https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447998 CESTAT Chennai remanded a service tax valuation case back to the adjudicating authority for fresh determination. The dispute involved inclusion of reimbursed charges in assessable value under Section 67 of Finance Act 1994 and Rule 5 of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. The appellant claimed pure agent services exclusion but failed to provide supporting documents to the Commissioner. The appellant contended all documents were seized by investigating officers. CESTAT found merit in appellant's plea and set aside the impugned order, directing de novo adjudication to prevent failure of justice. en-us Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Jan 2024 17:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447998 CESTAT Chennai remanded a service tax valuation case back to the adjudicating authority for fresh determination. The dispute involved inclusion of reimbursed charges in assessable value under Section 67 of Finance Act 1994 and Rule 5 of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. The appellant claimed pure agent services exclusion but failed to provide supporting documents to the Commissioner. The appellant contended all documents were seized by investigating officers. CESTAT found merit in appellant's plea and set aside the impugned order, directing de novo adjudication to prevent failure of justice. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447998