Gujarat High Court Dismisses Revenue's ₹3.44 Cr Service Tax Appeal Over Fees Collected From Gir Forest Visitors

The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a Revenue appeal against the Deputy Conservator of Forests in a ₹3.44-crore service tax dispute over permit fees, entry fees, camera fees, and other charges collected from visitors to Gir Forest.

The court relied on an earlier ruling that had held that such fees cannot be treated as consideration for taxable services, as the Deputy Conservator of Forests was discharging sovereign functions while collecting them in his official capacity.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Bhargav D. Karia and Justice Pranav Trivedi was dealing with the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Central Goods and Services Tax, Bhavnagar.

The appeal arose from an order of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal allowing the appeals filed by the Deputy Conservator of Forests against the service tax demands.

The adjudicating authority had held that the Deputy Conservator of Forests fell within the category of “Tour Operator” under the Finance Act, 1994, relying on entry fees, camera fees and other charges collected from visitors.

The authority further held that the respondent was engaged in planning, scheduling, organising or arranging tours by vehicles and had not obtained service tax registration under the relevant categories.

The adjudicating authority ultimately confirmed a service tax demand of ₹3,44,77,774, along with interest.

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal subsequently allowed the appeals by relying on its earlier judgment concerning the Deputy Conservator of Forests.

The High Court noted that the issue in the present appeal had already been decided by the Court in an earlier appeal involving the same dispute.

In that case, the court held that the officer was discharging sovereign functions while collecting permit fees and other charges in his official capacity and that the activities did not constitute taxable services. It also held that any valid service tax claim would lie against the Government of Gujarat rather than the officer personally.

The Court recorded, “Thus, the order which is impugned in the present matter and the issue involved therein, is already decided by this Court in Tax Appeal No.505 of 2025 and allied appeal.”

In view of the earlier decision, the Bench held that no question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arose for consideration in the present appeal.

It held, “In view of the same, no question of law, much less any substantial question of law arises in the present appeal, which calls for deliberation. Hence, the present appeal stands dismissed.”

The Gujarat High Court accordingly dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

For Appellant: Parth Mehta for Ankit Shah

For Respondent: Shrunjal Shah, Assistant Government Pleader