Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2018 (11) TMI 1804 - AT - Service TaxClassification of services - Business Auxiliary Services or not - rendering of services as an air travel agent - HELD THAT - On perusal of the statutory provisions vis-a-vis the activities undertaken by the appellant we find that the appellant is not an agent working on behalf of the customers for facilitating purchase of tickets from the GSAs. The customers approaching the appellant for booking of tickets are not aware about the particular GSA who issues the ticket through the appellant. In order to fall under the purview of business auxiliary service there must be involvement of three parties namely the service provider service receiver and the agent facilitating procurement of service for and on behalf of the service provider. In other words all the three parties involved in the contract must be known to each other in order to be classifiable under such head of service. It is an admitted fact on record that for booking of ticket the passenger only approached the appellant and not the GSA. Verifying the economic aspect the sub-agent like the appellant approaches a particular GSA for booking of tickets. Thus in absence of any connection between the GSA the appellant and its customer the activities cannot be considered as a service exigable to service tax under the taxable category of business auxiliary service. Since GSA s payment of service tax under air travel service was accepted by the department contrary stand cannot be taken to fasten the tax liability on the appellant under a different category of service namely business auxiliary service - there are no reason to sustain the adjudged demands confirmed on the appellant. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.
|