https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775388 The CESTAT Kolkata set aside the service tax demand of Rs. 41,99,006/- on 'Other Expenses' and 'Extra Hour Service Charges' for 2009-10 to 2012-13, holding such incidental reimbursements not includible in taxable value per Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, consistent with SC precedent. Interest demand on delayed payment for renting of immovable property service was also quashed due to genuine dispute and judicial pronouncements negating liability. However, interest of Rs. 1,03,220/- on delayed payment for Maintenance or Repair Services was upheld. The extended limitation period was not invoked due to lack of fraud or willful suppression, leading to penalty relief. Penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 77 FA for non-registration in renting service was upheld. The appeal was disposed accordingly. en-us Wed, 23 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jul 2025 08:28:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775388 The CESTAT Kolkata set aside the service tax demand of Rs. 41,99,006/- on 'Other Expenses' and 'Extra Hour Service Charges' for 2009-10 to 2012-13, holding such incidental reimbursements not includible in taxable value per Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, consistent with SC precedent. Interest demand on delayed payment for renting of immovable property service was also quashed due to genuine dispute and judicial pronouncements negating liability. However, interest of Rs. 1,03,220/- on delayed payment for Maintenance or Repair Services was upheld. The extended limitation period was not invoked due to lack of fraud or willful suppression, leading to penalty relief. Penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 77 FA for non-registration in renting service was upheld. The appeal was disposed accordingly. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 23 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775388