https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447685 CESTAT New Delhi held that appellant provided business support services, not hotel services as determined by Commissioner. The tribunal found service tax demand on reimbursement expenses unjustified under Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. Citing SC precedents in Bhayana Builders and Intercontinental Consultants cases, CESTAT ruled reimbursable expenses lacked consideration nexus required for service tax liability. The tribunal emphasized consideration must be for taxable services with clear quid pro quo relationship. Commissioner's order dated 04.04.2022 was set aside and appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 06 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jan 2024 08:14:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447685 CESTAT New Delhi held that appellant provided business support services, not hotel services as determined by Commissioner. The tribunal found service tax demand on reimbursement expenses unjustified under Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. Citing SC precedents in Bhayana Builders and Intercontinental Consultants cases, CESTAT ruled reimbursable expenses lacked consideration nexus required for service tax liability. The tribunal emphasized consideration must be for taxable services with clear quid pro quo relationship. Commissioner's order dated 04.04.2022 was set aside and appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 06 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447685