TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is a contract carriage operator, operating contract carriages, permits of which are issued by the State Transport Authority, Chennai. When the respondent wanted to impose service tax in respect of the petitioner, they filed a writ petition before this Court and the same was disposed of by a Division Bench along with several other writ petitions with a direction to the petitioners to raise their objections with the concerned authorities issued notices. It is further stated in the judgment that the authority would decide as to whether the petitioners' vehicles are the tourist vehicles as contemplated under Section 2(43) of the Motor Vehicles Act. When the petitioner has received notice from the respondent dated 30-9-2002, he sent a reply e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30-4-2001 by this Court, upholding the constitution validity of service tax on tour operators. Based on the judgment, letters were sent to all the tour operators including omni bus operators to get themselves registered and pay service tax. One among them was the petitioner herein who was requested to get themselves registered as tour operator in letter C.No. IV/16/368/2001-STC (III) dated 6-8-2002. In the light of the categorical conclusion arrived at by the Division Bench in Writ Petition No. 20 of 1998 etc., batch and in view of the statutory provision, the vehicle used in a tour is a tourist vehicle, since the vehicle of the petitioner is a tourist vehicle, they are covered by Section 65 of the Finance Act. As per the said judgment, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is also not disputed that petitioner is a contract carriage operator, operating contract carriages for which permits are issued by the State Transport Authority, Chennai. When the respondent wanted to impose service tax in respect of the petitioner and others, the said action was challenged by way of writ petitions on the ground that it does not apply to contract carriages as the word used is only "tourist vehicle". After considering all the contentions relating to recovery of service tax on tour operators, the Division Bench dismissed all the writ petitions upholding the legislative competence as well as the merits and applicability of the provisions of the Finance Act to the stage carriage operators, contract carriage operators, cab/ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e permits and the owners of the spare buses thereunder. The same rationale would apply even to the contract carriage vehicles covered by the permit under Section 74 of the Motor Vehicles Act. In fact, the most of the petitioners, who are having the contract carriage, are having the permits under Section 88 (9) of the Motor Vehicles Act read with Section 82, which are nothing but "tourist permits", issued for the purpose of promoting the tourism and obviously issued to the tourist vehicles as contemplated under that section. Therefore, there will be no question of entertaining their objections and they will straightaway be covered under Section 65(52) of the Finance Act. Such petitions, where the permits are under Section 88 (9) of the Motor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
