SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
S.MURALIDHAR, PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Jet Airways India Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Customs – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. A short question that has arisen in the present petition is whether the Petitioner is entitled to refund of Inland Air Travel Tax (`IATT') deposited by it for the period, 1st October, 2001 to 8th October, 2003. The refund is sought on the basis that Sky Marshals who were deployed on its aircrafts are not `passengers' within the meaning of Section 41(f)(ii) of the Finance Act, 1989 (`FA') and hence no IATT is payable qua the sky marshals.

2. In view of the increasing threat perception to air passengers, crew and aircrafts, the Government of India issued Notification dated 20th September, 2001, making it mandatory for air carriers to carry Sky Marshals free of charge. The deployment of Sky Marshals was to be done by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (`BCAS') from time to time. Initially, this obligation was imposed only on Indian Airlines. A corresponding Notification dated 19th April, 2001 was issued under Section 42 (1) of the Finance Act, 1989 exempting Indian Airlines from payment of IATT. Thereafter, the obligation to deploy Sky Marshals, was extended to private airlines as well by AVSEC order 7/2001 dated 20th September, 2001. In view of thi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top