https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776067 The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal, setting aside the service tax demand on transaction charges collected from customers and deposited with stock exchanges. The department had included these charges in the gross value under Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, but the rule was struck down by the Delhi HC. Since the charges were paid as a pure agent without markup and the service tax liability on stock broking services was already discharged, the demand could not be sustained. Consequently, the impugned order confirming the demand was quashed. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776067 The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal, setting aside the service tax demand on transaction charges collected from customers and deposited with stock exchanges. The department had included these charges in the gross value under Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, but the rule was struck down by the Delhi HC. Since the charges were paid as a pure agent without markup and the service tax liability on stock broking services was already discharged, the demand could not be sustained. Consequently, the impugned order confirming the demand was quashed. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776067