Order Date – 10 January 2024

Parties: M/s Make My Trip (India) Private Limited Vs Additional Director General, Directorate General of GST Intelligence

Facts –

• The Appellant, M/s Make My Trip (India) Private Limited, discharged the service tax liability on the entire amount received from the customers (which is inclusive of taxes) under the category of “tour operator services‟ by availing the benefit of abatement of 90 percent under notification dated 01.03.2006 (till 30.06.2012) and under notification dated 20.06.2012 (w.e.f. 01.07.2012).
• A show cause notice was issued consequent to an investigation alleging that the appellant was rendering tour operator services to customers as it was providing short-term hotel accommodation services and was not discharging service tax liability under this category. Further the appellant was not entitled to abatement under the Abatement Notifications as the appellant did not fulfil any of the three conditions stipulated in the Notifications.

Issue –

• Whether the appellant is entitled to abatement of 90 percent and whether they are providing short-term accommodation service?

Order –

• The Tribunal observed that the appellant is merely a booking agent and not an agent of the hotel, as is evident from Privilege Partnership Agreement and the User Agreement entered into between the appellant and the customers. It is the hotel that has provided the service of short-term accommodation to the customers, and the appellant has merely acted as a facilitator between the hotel and the customer for the provision of short-term accommodation service by the hotels to the customers. 
• The appellant is engaged in business of arranging tours, including accommodation through online portal. It would, therefore, qualify to be a tour operator. when a person, otherwise is qualified as a tour operator but provides only booking of accommodation service, then such a tour operator would be entitled to ninety percent abatement. What is required is the qualification of a tour operator itself (qua the person), and not as the services rendered (qua transaction).
• It is clear that the taxes collected by the appellant from customer has been paid to the hotel and the appellant has also has discharged service tax liability by paying service tax on the amount collected by from the customer after availing the benefit of the Abatement Notifications as a tour operator. Section 73A of the Finance Act would, therefore, not be attracted.
• Hence the confirmation of the demands proposed in the show cause notice and the two Statement of Demands cannot be sustained. The appeals are allowed.