<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (11) TMI 1024 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781556</link>
    <description>CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that service tax cannot be levied on reimbursable expenditures recovered by a service provider for taxable services. The tribunal followed the SC precedent affirming that Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax Valuation Rules, 2006 cannot expand valuation beyond Sections 66 and 67, so reimbursed costs are not part of taxable value. The impugned order was set aside on the merits; limitation issues were not examined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 08:42:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=865295" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1024 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781556</link>
      <description>CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that service tax cannot be levied on reimbursable expenditures recovered by a service provider for taxable services. The tribunal followed the SC precedent affirming that Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax Valuation Rules, 2006 cannot expand valuation beyond Sections 66 and 67, so reimbursed costs are not part of taxable value. The impugned order was set aside on the merits; limitation issues were not examined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781556</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>