https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782683 CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside service tax demand on reimbursement of electricity charges recovered by the Appellant from customers. It held that, in view of binding precedent striking down Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, reimbursable expenses such as electricity charges are not includible in taxable value, rendering the contrary reasoning of the adjudicating authority unsustainable. On limitation, CESTAT ruled that the extended period could not be invoked where the demand arose from a departmental audit and no suppression with intent to evade tax was established. Consequently, the impugned order was declared unsustainable in law. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782683 CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside service tax demand on reimbursement of electricity charges recovered by the Appellant from customers. It held that, in view of binding precedent striking down Rule 5 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, reimbursable expenses such as electricity charges are not includible in taxable value, rendering the contrary reasoning of the adjudicating authority unsustainable. On limitation, CESTAT ruled that the extended period could not be invoked where the demand arose from a departmental audit and no suppression with intent to evade tax was established. Consequently, the impugned order was declared unsustainable in law. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782683