TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the airline, and does not include the airfare collected by air travel agent in respect of service provided by him - N/N. 20/97 dated 26.06.1997 makes it clear that basic fare means, that part of the fare on which commission is normally paid to the travel agent by the airlines. Therefore it needs to be verified as to what is the actual commission received by the appellant. In a similar issue the Tribunal in the case of Aero World Travels Vs CCE, Jalandhar [2005 (2) TMI 7 - CESTAT (NEW DELHI)] observed that Revenue was in error in treating the printed fare on the tickets as basic fare. This indicates that the word basic fare used by IATA in their BSP statement and the basic fare used in Notification 20/97 dated 26.06.1997 may not be the same. The matter requires to be remanded to the original authority who shall verify as to the quantum of actual commission received by appellant - appeal allowed by way of remand. - ST/217/2006, ST/41/2007, ST/141/2008, ST/242/2009, ST/557/2009, ST/61/2010, ST/303/2010, ST/780/2010 - Final Order Nos. 41284-41291 / 2017 - Dated:- 25-7-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11,48,275 2. ST/41/2007 10/2004 to 09/2005 7,46,115 3. ST/141/2008 10/2005 to 09/2006 2,88,905 4. ST/242/2009 10/2006 to 03/2007 1,71,226 5. ST/557/2009 04/2007 to 09/2007 2,63,893 6. ST/61/2010 10/2007 to 03/2008 2,47,614 7. ST/303/2010 04/2008 to 03/2009 79,870 4. On behalf of the appellant, Shri R. Raghavan, the learned counsel, argued that the confirmation of service tax has been made on wrong appreciation of facts. That the show cause notice itself in based on incorrect facts. That appellant has not received any commission from the airlines as alleged in the show cause notice. The appellant has discharged the service tax liability as per the TDS (income tax) deductions made by the Airlines on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tatement, the sum total of standard and supplementary commission is shown as commission . That irrespective of the price for which the air ticket is sold by appellant, this amount is the actual commission received by appellant from airline for sale of air ticket. On receiving the BSP fortnightly bills, the appellant deducts the amount shown against commission from the sale value of the ticket and pays only the balance amount to IATA-BSP, Mumbai. Thus the commission is adjusted and service tax is payable on this amount. That the demand raised is legal and sustainable. 6. We have heard both sides. 7. The basic allegation is that the commission received by appellant includes two components, namely, standard commission and supplementary commission. The standard commission is @ 5% or 7% of basic fare and appellant has been discharging service tax on this standard commission. It is the case of department, that appellant has not discharged service tax on the supplementary commission received by them. This is controverted by the appellant stating that they have not received any amount as supplementary commission. From the impugned order, it is seen that original authority has explain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... portion of the order of Tribunal in Aero World Travels is noteworthy and reproduced as under: 2. The appellant s contention is that under Section 66 of the Finance Act, the rate of tax was only 5% of taxable service and Notification No. 22/97, dated 26-6-1997 had exempted any value of taxable service in excess of the commission received by the Air Travel Agent. It is, therefore, being pointed out that, in any case, the appellant cannot be liable for service tax in excess of 5% of the total margin realized. During the hearing of the case, it was pointed out that the Revenue authorities were in error in treating the printed fare on the tickets as basic fare and demanding only service tax at 0.5% of that amounts. It is also being emphasized that the option to pay at 0.5% of the basic fare cannot be converted into a burden on the appellant, of paying service tax at an amount higher than his total margin. 3. I have perused the records and heard learned DR also. 4. The appellant is right in his contention that his margin from the sale of ticket alone can constitute his agency commission and a tax is to be levied on that commission. A perusal of the records shows that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
