9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ours are not ‘tourist vehicle’ - hence appellant cannot be said to be a tour operators - no infirmity in the impugned order setting aside the service tax demand for the period prior to 10-9-2004 - Revenue’s appeals are dismissed - ST/447-448/2006 - ST/317-318/2008(PB) - Dated:- 23-10-2008 - S/Shri S.S. Kang, Vice-President and Rakesh Kumar, Member (T) Shri Sunil Kumar, DR, for the Appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icle Rules. The CCE (Appeals) vide the impugned orders has set aside the service tax demand for the period prior to 10-9-04 on the ground that during the period prior to 10-9-04 service tax was chargeable only if a person was operating tours in a tourist vehicle covered by a permit granted under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and that since the appellant's vehicle were not registered as "tourist vehicle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered under the service tax. 2.2 Shri S.K. Pahwa, Advocate, the learned counsel on behalf of the Respondents made the following submissions:- (1) The issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of Secretary, Federation of Bus-Operators Association of Tamil Nadu v. Union of India reported in 2006 (2) S.T.R. 411 (Mad.) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the definition of 'tourist vehicle' defined under Section 2(43) of the Motor Vehicles Act, read with Rules 128 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules. (2) The above-mentioned judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court has been followed by the Tribunal in the cases of Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Vadodara-II v. Gandhi Travels reported in 2007 (6) S.T.R. 430 (Tri.- Ahmd.) and Gatula ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
