<?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>2026 (4) TMI 65 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788996</link>
    <description>Reimbursable transportation expenses separately billed by a clearing and forwarding agent were not includible in taxable value under section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, as the valuation rules could not bring back such outlays for the relevant period and the Intercontinental Consultants principle excluded them. Cenvat credit on outdoor catering services was not admissible for the relevant period because Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 excluded such services when used primarily for employee consumption. Extended limitation was unavailable because the record did not show wilful suppression, fraud, collusion or misstatement with intent to evade tax; the demand was therefore confined to the normal period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 08:50:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894588" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 65 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788996</link>
      <description>Reimbursable transportation expenses separately billed by a clearing and forwarding agent were not includible in taxable value under section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, as the valuation rules could not bring back such outlays for the relevant period and the Intercontinental Consultants principle excluded them. Cenvat credit on outdoor catering services was not admissible for the relevant period because Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 excluded such services when used primarily for employee consumption. Extended limitation was unavailable because the record did not show wilful suppression, fraud, collusion or misstatement with intent to evade tax; the demand was therefore confined to the normal period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788996</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>