https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782492 CESTAT (Allahabad) held, by majority, that amounts collected by the appellant from flat buyers towards lease rent payable to the development authority constituted reimbursable expenses and not consideration for construction of complex service under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, for the pre-14.05.2015 period. Since the 2015 amendment expanding "consideration" to include reimbursements operates prospectively, such reimbursements could not be included in the taxable value for the disputed period. Consequently, lease rent recovered on behalf of the authority was to be excluded from the gross amount for service tax computation, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Dec 2025 08:50:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782492 CESTAT (Allahabad) held, by majority, that amounts collected by the appellant from flat buyers towards lease rent payable to the development authority constituted reimbursable expenses and not consideration for construction of complex service under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, for the pre-14.05.2015 period. Since the 2015 amendment expanding "consideration" to include reimbursements operates prospectively, such reimbursements could not be included in the taxable value for the disputed period. Consequently, lease rent recovered on behalf of the authority was to be excluded from the gross amount for service tax computation, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782492