Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy - Court Judgment |
| Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai |
| May-15-2009 |
| Appeal No. S/29 of 2007 |
| HON’BLE MS.JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, VICE-PRESIDENT |
| Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd. |
| Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy |
| For the Appearing Parties: S. Renganathan, Advocate. V.V. Hariharan, JCDR. |
i have heard both sides on the appeal against the order of the commissioner of central excise confirming a demand of service tax of rs.40,920/- together with interest by holding that the appellants herein were rendering tour operators services for the period from 10.9.2004 to 30.9.2004 and imposing a penalty of amount equal to the tax under section 78 and penalty of rs.1000/- under section 77 and penalty of rs.200/- per day from the date on which the service tax for the month of september 04 ought to have been paid until the payment of the tax, under section 76 of chapter v of the finance act, 1994. 2. i find that the issue as to whether the appellants are rendering tour operator services is no longer res in tegra as in the case of the same assessee, for the period subsequent to the period in the present case, the tribunal has already held that appellants have only provided transport and they have not rendered tour operator service so as to be liable to service tax there under vide final order no. 191/09 dated. 17.2.09. following the ratio of the above decision, which is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case, i set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.
I have heard both sides on the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise confirming a demand of service tax of Rs.40,920/- together with interest by holding that the appellants herein were rendering tour operators services for the period from 10.9.2004 to 30.9.2004 and imposing a penalty of amount equal to the tax under Section 78 and penalty of Rs.1000/- under Section 77 and penalty of Rs.200/- per day from the date on which the service tax for the month of September 04 ought to have been paid until the payment of the tax, under Section 76 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994.
2. I find that the issue as to whether the appellants are rendering tour operator services is no longer res in tegra as in the case of the same assessee, for the period subsequent to the period in the present case, the Tribunal has already held that appellants have only provided transport and they have not rendered tour operator service so as to be liable to service tax there under vide Final Order No. 191/09 dated. 17.2.09. Following the ratio of the above decision, which is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.