75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

May 2014

2014 (33) STR 619 (Uttarakhand) Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut –I vs. Usha Breco Ltd.

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri, Mandar Telang Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Whether provision of transportation service which is an ancillary to main business activity would be classified as “Tour Operator’s Service”? Held, no.

Facts:
The appellant was operating two ropeways at Haridwar at two different places. The appellant was charging fees from pilgrims for the use of the said ropeways. The distance between these two ropeways was about 3.75 kms. For those interested in using the ropeways at both places, the appellant provided transportation from one ropeway to the other by road against consideration of separate fees. The department demanded Service Tax on these fees charges for transporting pilgrims from one place of ropeway to another under “Tour Operator Service.” The appellant contended that the said service was not exigible to tax under ‘Tour Operator service’ and the appellant was not a tour operator. The Tribunal held that the appellant could not be regarded as tour operator as the transportation was not a main business of the appellant.

Held:
Since there was no change in the facts and these were considered by the Tribunal, the High Court declined to interfere and dismissed the appeal filed by the department.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

2014 (33) STR 609 (All) A C L Education Centre (P) Ltd vs. UOI

2014 (33) STR 621 (Guj) Comm. Of C. Ex & Cust. Ahmedabad-III vs. Fine Care Biosystems