<?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>Appeal partly succeeds: electricity and utility charges as pure agent under Rule 5 not taxable; penalties removed</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94541</link>
    <description>CESTAT allowed the appeal substantially. It held that amounts recovered from tenants towards electricity, transmission and distribution losses, gas and air-conditioning, collected as a pure agent under Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, were not liable to service tax as bundled services; the demand of Rs. 2,32,48,096/- was set aside. Service tax of Rs. 7,010/- under RCM on legal services, already paid with interest and not contested, was upheld. Disallowance of CENVAT credit was restricted to Rs. 90,787/- (with interest), as voluntarily reversed; the balance disallowance was quashed. Demands on advances, being refundable loans, were set aside. Absence of intent to evade being established, all penalties imposed in the impugned order were vacated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=867558" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appeal partly succeeds: electricity and utility charges as pure agent under Rule 5 not taxable; penalties removed</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94541</link>
      <description>CESTAT allowed the appeal substantially. It held that amounts recovered from tenants towards electricity, transmission and distribution losses, gas and air-conditioning, collected as a pure agent under Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, were not liable to service tax as bundled services; the demand of Rs. 2,32,48,096/- was set aside. Service tax of Rs. 7,010/- under RCM on legal services, already paid with interest and not contested, was upheld. Disallowance of CENVAT credit was restricted to Rs. 90,787/- (with interest), as voluntarily reversed; the balance disallowance was quashed. Demands on advances, being refundable loans, were set aside. Absence of intent to evade being established, all penalties imposed in the impugned order were vacated.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94541</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>