<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (4) TMI 1508 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359397</link>
    <description>Charges for food, beverage, catering and related ancillary facilities recovered alongside mandap keeper or hotel services were not wholly excludible from assessable value under Notification No. 12/2003-ST. The Tribunal followed its earlier view that such elements formed part of the taxable service when separately billed in connection with the main service, so the claim for complete exclusion failed. It also noted that, where the cost of food was included in the overall recovery and the factual conditions were satisfied, only the limited benefit of the applicable abatement notification could be considered. The service tax demand was therefore confirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2018 06:10:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518430" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1508 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359397</link>
      <description>Charges for food, beverage, catering and related ancillary facilities recovered alongside mandap keeper or hotel services were not wholly excludible from assessable value under Notification No. 12/2003-ST. The Tribunal followed its earlier view that such elements formed part of the taxable service when separately billed in connection with the main service, so the claim for complete exclusion failed. It also noted that, where the cost of food was included in the overall recovery and the factual conditions were satisfied, only the limited benefit of the applicable abatement notification could be considered. The service tax demand was therefore confirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>