It is not. Perhaps I I might explain how the position appears at the moment. Then we might be clearer. In the ordinary way, separate considerations would be charged for a taxable activity on the one hand and an exempted activity on the other and no difficulty would arise, but in other circumstances the essential character of the activity would have to be looked at. For instance, the exemption for passenger transport would not be regarded as lost merely because the passenger was served a meal on the journey. Similarly, a contract for maintenance in an hotel would not be regarded as exempted merely because the hotel provides transport. Section 11 (3) provides:
Subject to sections 5 (5) and 10 (8) (c), where—
(a) goods of different kinds or services of different kinds or goods, whether or not of different kinds, and services, whether or not of different kinds, are delivered, or rendered, or delivered and rendered, for a consideration that is referable to the transaction as a whole and not separately to the different kinds of goods or goods and services.
Does that clarify it for the Deputy?