9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be attracted only in case tour operator is using tourist vehicle and not otherwise - Since there is no evidence that the vehicles being used by the respondent are tourist vehicles as defined under Section 2(43) of Motor Vehicle Act, read with Rule 128 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, the respondent’s activity would not be covered by the tour operator’s service X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent in the case of M.P. Transport Service vs. CCE, Bhopal, reported in 2007 (5) STR 47 (Tri.-Del.) and the judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Sri Pandyan Travels vs. CCE, Chennai, reported in 2004 (163) E.L.T. 409 (Mad.). 3. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned D.R. and have gone through the records. The Appellant's activity is sought to be subjected to se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 988. Section 2(43) of the Motor Vehicle Act defines Tourist Vehicle as -'a contract carriage constructed and adapted and equipped and manufactured in accordance with such specifications as may be prescribed in this behalf. Rule 128 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules provides, the specifications for 'Tourist Vehicle'. There is no dispute that the vehicles and an contract carriage as defined under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We find that the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of L.V. Sankeshwar vs. Superintendent of Central Excise, Jayanagar, reported in 2006 (4) STR 257 (Kar.) has also held that service tax would be attracted only in case tour operator is using tourist vehicle and not otherwise. Tribunal's judgement in case of M.P. Transport Service (supra) cited by the learned D.R. is only in respect of stay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
