Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Service tax penalty can’t survive when assessee acted on dept.’s own view of non-taxability: Delhi High Court. *  GST section 74 extended limitation questionable when form 26AS mismatch was already known: Karnataka High Court grants interim relief. *  CGST demand prima facie impermissible after state GST settlement under section 128A: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court asks GSTAT to sympathetically consider delay as taxpayers pursued remedy before wrong forum. *  Supreme Court stays Tripura High Court ruling protecting genuine buyers from ITC denial over supplier’s GST default. *  Diary entries alone can’t prove clandestine removal of goods: CESTAT quashes excise penalty on steel trader. *  Customs could investigate preferential tariff claims even before sec. 28DA: Delhi High Court. *  Customs dept. relied on fake AI generated case laws: supreme court quashes Rs. 425.28 crore penalty. *  No GST exemption in affiliation and annual registration charges for admission or conduct Of examinations: GSTAT. *  Mere invoices, cheque payments insufficient to establish genuine movement of goods: GSTAT restores Rs. 43.44 lakh ITC demand. *  Consolidated GST show cause notice covering multiple financial years is not without jurisdiction: Delhi High Court. *  Construction of independent houses on separate plots not taxable as ‘Residential Complex’ without common facilities: CESTAT. *  GST penalty exceeding statutory maximum unsustainable; Allahabad High Court quashes ? 50,000/- penalty after taxpayer filed return and paid late fee. *  GST order against standard chartered bank passed without hearing set aside by Bombay High Court. *  Retracted statements can’t be relied upon without cross-examination: CESTAT quashes gold confiscation. *  Burden to prove misclassification lies on customs department: CESTAT. *  CESTAT quashes Rs. 98 lakh excise demand on clearance of used refractory brick scrap. *  Service tax demand on irrigation works quashed: Karnataka High Court rules sale of goods component not taxable as service. *  GSTAT restores tax and penalty for transporting iron scrap without E-way bill citing intent to evade tax. *  Madras High Court stays GST recovery from directors without opportunity to show cause under section 89. *  Madras high court stays GST recovery notice against directors; finds prima facie case on applicability of section 79(1)(c). *  Procedural lapses can’t justify harsh punishment without serious customs breach: CESTAT quashes customs broker licence revocation. *  Service tax payable on land leasing and sports complex charges: CESTAT. *  Settled customs dispute can’t be reopened through Article 226 challenge to interest liability: Delhi High Court. *  Mere facilitation of customs clearance can’t establish knowledge of smuggling: Madras High Court. *  GST registration cancellation stayed: Allahabad High Court questions 99% ITC utilisation cap under rule 86B. *  Composition scheme lapses automatically on crossing Rs. 1.5 crore turnover: GSTAT. *  Gujarat High Court quashes GST cancellation orders after officer relied on non-existent AI-generated case laws. *  Importers liable for customs duty benefits availed through manipulated scrips: Delhi High Court. *  Procedural E-way bill lapse alone can’t justify penalty where genuine transaction and absence of tax evasion are established: GSTAT.
Subject News *  Documentary evidence dominates probe, further custody unwarranted: mumbai court grants bail in Rs. 22.44 crore customs duty evasion case. *  Business premises can’t remain sealed for non-participation in GST search: Allahabad High Court. *  GST pre-deposit must be refunded proportionately when taxpayer partly succeeds in appeal: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court grants 30 days to file GST appeal; keeps pre-deposit issue open due to deposit in parallel CGST proceedings. *  GST demand can’t exceed amount proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore order. *  Hundreds-of-crores GST demand and heavy 10% pre-deposit no ground to bypass statutory appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Delhi High Court refuses to entertain challenge to gold confiscation due to statutory appeal remedy and unexplained delay. *  Procedural error in customs broker licence inquiry can be rectified through remand: Delhi High Court. *  GSTR-2A mismatch alone can’t justify ITC denial without invoice-wise verification; personal hearing mandatory: GSTAT. *  GST order passed without uploading personal hearing notices violates sec. 75(4): Allahabad High Court. *  TAX EVASION - Sec. 74 GST SCN quashed for not spelling out fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression: Allahabad High Court. *  STPI’s SOFTEX certification and NoC charges taxable as business support services: CESTAT. *  Suspicion can’t replace proof: CESTAT quashes penalty in alleged gold-smuggling operation. *   Limitation runs from communication of order: Madras High Court upholds rejection of delayed GST Appeals. *  Rajasthan High Court quashes GST demand over unsigned show cause notice. *  ITC recovery upheld where supplier failed to deposit GST: Rajasthan High Court. *  Customs commissioner’s empowered to make port trust liable for duty on pilfered goods: Supreme Court. *  Rectification proceedings can’t be used to challenge an uncontested GST assessment through a writ petition: Andhra Pradesh HC. *  GST proceedings against deceased proprietor unsustainable without notice to legal heir: GSTAT. *  Mere availment of ineligible self-assessed ITC doesn’t amount to suppression without evidence of fraud or wilful misstatement: GSTAT. *  Disposal of mining overburden by entity authorised by mining lease holder constitutes taxable service: CESTAT. *  Toll plaza data not mandatory for ITC refund: GSTAT. *  Disputed GST fraud allegations require investigation: Punjab and Haryana High Court makes interim bail absolute in alleged fraud and GST fraud case. *  Non-manufacturer contractor liable to deposit excess excise duty collected from buyer: CESTAT. *  GST order can’t reject taxpayer’s reply as “not satisfactory” without reasons: Madhya Pradesh High Court. *  Uncorroborated statements can’t establish alleged diversion of duty-free goods: CESTAT. *  Erection services were not liable to service tax prior to 10th september 2004: CESTAT. *  Sec. 74 GST notice must spell out statutory ingredients for invoking extended tax demand proceedings: Allahabad High Court. *  No jurisdictional bar under section 6(2)(b) in parallel CGST SGST proceedings: Delhi High Court refuses to bypass GST appeal remedy. *  Madras High Court remits GST demand for fresh adjudication after taxpayer claims it was unaware of SCN following business closure.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2012-13/1134

Whether the Outbound services as, booking of air tickets, arrangements of food, local travel, hotel stay at places outside India are covered under the category of ‘Tour operator Services’?
Case: TRAVEL CORPORATION INDIA LTD. V/S COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., COCHIN
 
Citation: 2012 (26) S.T.R. 8 (Tri.-Bang.)
 
Issue:-  Whether the Outbound services as, booking of air tickets, arrangements of food, local travel, hotel stay at places outside India are covered under the category of ‘Tour operator Services’? 
 
Brief Facts: - Applicant is engaged in arranging tours/tour packages within India and out of India. The present dispute relates to 'Out Bound Tours'. The applicant undertakes activities like booking of air tickets, arrangements for hotel stay at places outside India, food, local travel at places outside India, etc. They also undertake work relating to Visa formalities. Information found scattered in the show-cause notice, some paragraphs of Order-in-Original and letter given by the applicant to the Range Superintendent, prima facie indicates that the applicant is paying Service Tax under the category 'Air Travel Services" in respect of tickets booked from place in India to the first place outside India and air travel from last destination in foreign country to first destination in India. It appears from the order, the department has held that the entire amount collected from the tourists including airfare to-and-fro and towards expenses incurred in connection with arrangements like hotel stay and sight-seeing was to be included under the category of "Tour Operator Services". Accordingly, the Commissioner has confirmed the demand of Service tax of Rs. 62,59,120/- relating to the period 1-4-2004 to 31-3-2008 along with interest and imposed penalties under different Sections.
 
 
 
Appellant’s Contention: - The appellant contended that though some activities are undertaken in India relating to planning of tour package, the entire activities of travel, stay, sightseeing etc. take place in a foreign country and planning also involve coordinating with counter-parts in foreign countries. Appeallant relies on paragraph 2.6 of Board's Circular F. No. B. 43/10/97-TRU, dated 22-8-1997 and submits that the said Circular issued by TRU at the time of introduction of services clearly stipulates that the out-bound tours are not subjected to service tax under the category "Tour Operator Services" and also submits that the said Circular has not been withdrawn while issuing the Master Circular No. 96/7/2007-Service Tax, dated 23-8-2007. As per paragraph 7 of the said Master Circular, letters issued by TRU at the time of introduction of services have to be read in the light of the definition of the services. He also relies on the Stay Order No. 548/2011, dated 28-6-2011 in an identical case of M/s. Cox & Kings (India) Ltd. [2011 (24) S.T.R. 631 (Tri.)].
                                                                   
 
Respondent’s Contention: - The respondents on the other hand reiterating the findings and reasoning of the Commissioner in his order, submits that primarily, planning relating to the tour is done in India and therefore, pre-deposit of the dues as per the impugned order should be ordered.
 
Reasoning of Judgment: - The Hon’ble Tribunal held that planning and arrangements undertaken are primarily relating to out-bound tours and the same involve coordination with agencies outside India. He also held that the Board's Circular F. No. B.43/10/97-TRU, dated 22-8-1997 has treated the activities of out-bound tours as outside the purview of service tax. Further he find that the service tax undisputedly stands paid on airfares from India to the first destination in foreign country and for airfares from last destination abroad to first destination in India, as air travel services. In view of the above, and in view of the stay order already granted in similar case, he waived pre-deposit of the dues as per the impugned order and stay recovery thereof till the disposal of the appeal.
 
 
Decision: - The stay was granted.
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com