<?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 (7) TMI 453 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794567</link>
    <description>Service tax was not leviable on the mark-up collected over actual ocean freight, as the margin was treated as a non-taxable profit component outside taxable service value. Pure-agent reimbursements for boat hire, launch hire, barge expenses and watchman charges were also excluded from the taxable base because they were incurred on behalf of customers and satisfied the Rule 5 valuation framework. Foreign exchange fluctuation gains were likewise held outside the ambit of service tax, since they did not constitute consideration for the taxable service. The Tribunal therefore sustained the assessee&#039;s position on all common issues and rejected inclusion of these amounts in value for service tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2026 09:08:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=910688" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 453 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794567</link>
      <description>Service tax was not leviable on the mark-up collected over actual ocean freight, as the margin was treated as a non-taxable profit component outside taxable service value. Pure-agent reimbursements for boat hire, launch hire, barge expenses and watchman charges were also excluded from the taxable base because they were incurred on behalf of customers and satisfied the Rule 5 valuation framework. Foreign exchange fluctuation gains were likewise held outside the ambit of service tax, since they did not constitute consideration for the taxable service. The Tribunal therefore sustained the assessee&#039;s position on all common issues and rejected inclusion of these amounts in value for service tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794567</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>