Reimbursed Expenses excluded from Taxable Value; valuation rule deemed inapplicable to genuine CHA reimbursements, favouring the assessee.

Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules cannot be used to fold genuine reimbursed expenses into the taxable value of Customs House Agent services where those reimbursements are actual, separately invoiced, and have a direct nexus to non taxable overseas services; the Supreme Court's limitation on valuation to the gross amount charged for the service and the CBEC guidance permitting exclusion of pure reimbursements govern valuation. The adjudicator's factual findings that many recovered costs related to overseas billing or to activities outside core CHA services support excluding those amounts, resulting in relief for the taxpayer for the periods considered.

---

---

Issues: Whether expenses recovered by a customs house agent from clients (reimbursable expenses/overseas/local expenses) are required to be included in the gross value charged for CHA services by invoking Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006.

Analysis: Legal framework includes Section 66 and Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 (valuation and charging provisions), Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 and CBEC Circular No. 119/13/2009-ST. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats Pvt Ltd has held that Rule 5(1) insofar as it seeks to include reimbursable expenses within the value of taxable services is ultra vires Section 67, and that valuation must be limited to the gross amount charged as consideration 'for such service'. The CBEC circular contemporaneously clarifies conditions where reimbursements may be excluded (e.g., actual reimbursement without markup, nexus to activity, separate invoicing). The adjudicating authority made fact findings that the amounts in question were reimbursements tied to overseas billing and that the primary overseas services were not taxable; it also held that many recovered expenses (air/sea freight, port/airport charges, local transportation) fall outside the core CHA activities taxable under the CHA definition. The combined legal authority and the Adjudicating Authority's findings support exclusion of genuine reimbursements from taxable value for the periods in question.

Conclusion: Rule 5(1) cannot be applied to include the reimbursable expenses in the taxable value for CHA services for the periods under consideration; therefore the impugned demands are not sustainable and the result is in favour of the assessee.

---