https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758307 The CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal regarding non-payment of service tax on reimbursement expenditures. The appellant, acting as C&F agent, recovered transportation charges from their principal on actual cost basis. The Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected the appeal, holding that extra amounts received disqualified the appellant from pure agent status under Rule 5 of Service Tax Valuation Rules, 2006, requiring inclusion in taxable value. However, CESTAT found this legally unsustainable, citing Delhi HC's ruling in Intercontinental Consultants case that declared Rule 5(1) ultra vires Section 67 of Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal held transportation charges reimbursed on actual basis as pure agent are not includable in taxable value, setting aside the impugned order. en-us Mon, 09 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Sep 2024 15:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758307 The CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal regarding non-payment of service tax on reimbursement expenditures. The appellant, acting as C&F agent, recovered transportation charges from their principal on actual cost basis. The Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected the appeal, holding that extra amounts received disqualified the appellant from pure agent status under Rule 5 of Service Tax Valuation Rules, 2006, requiring inclusion in taxable value. However, CESTAT found this legally unsustainable, citing Delhi HC's ruling in Intercontinental Consultants case that declared Rule 5(1) ultra vires Section 67 of Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal held transportation charges reimbursed on actual basis as pure agent are not includable in taxable value, setting aside the impugned order. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 09 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758307