https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429841 The appellant, a publisher and printer of newspapers, contested the demand for service tax on facility sharing charges, arguing they were reimbursement for electricity expenses and not taxable. The Commissioner (Appeals) determined that the charges were part of a service provision agreement, rejecting the appellant's claim of being a "pure agent." Additionally, the appellant successfully argued against taxability of service charges under "Business Support Service" received from Webdunia, with the tribunal ruling in their favor. The appellant was not liable for service tax on the facility charges shared with sister concerns, leading to the appeal being allowed and penalties set aside. en-us Wed, 02 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Jul 2023 14:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429841 The appellant, a publisher and printer of newspapers, contested the demand for service tax on facility sharing charges, arguing they were reimbursement for electricity expenses and not taxable. The Commissioner (Appeals) determined that the charges were part of a service provision agreement, rejecting the appellant's claim of being a "pure agent." Additionally, the appellant successfully argued against taxability of service charges under "Business Support Service" received from Webdunia, with the tribunal ruling in their favor. The appellant was not liable for service tax on the facility charges shared with sister concerns, leading to the appeal being allowed and penalties set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 02 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429841