2026-VIL-956-CESTAT-CHE-ST
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-956-CESTAT-CHE-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax - Inclusion of reimbursable expenses in taxable value of services - Whether reimbursable expenses incurred on behalf of customers and recovered on actual basis are includible in the taxable value of services for the period prior to 14.05.2015 – HELD – For the period prior to amendment of Section 67 with effect from 14.05.2015, reimbursable expenditure cannot be included in the gross value of taxable services. The Delhi High Court's decision in Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India established that Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax Valuation Rules was ultra vires Sections 66 and 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, since reimbursed expenses cannot be treated as the gross amount charged for the service. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling and clarified that only from 14.05.2015, after the amendment to Section 67 by the Finance Act, 2015, did reimbursable expenditure become includible in the taxable value - The demand on reimbursable expenses is set asidernrnGoods Transportation Agency Service - Classification of payments as goods transportation agency service without consignment note - Whether service tax can be demanded on alleged goods transportation agency service in the absence of issuance of a consignment note by the service provider – HELD - The issuance of a consignment note is an essential requirement for classification of a service provider as a goods transport agency. The absence of such evidence is fatal to the demand made. When there is no issuance of consignment note, there cannot be a goods transportation agency service and therefore no demand can be made - The demand for service tax under reverse charge on alleged goods transportation agency service is set aside.rnrnServices to SEZ Units - Whether a fresh demand for service tax can be raised for services where the tax liability has already been discharged through prior payment reflected in returns. HELD - Once service tax has already been paid, the same amount cannot be demanded again as it would result in double taxation. The appellant's case is that the duty has already been discharged, and there is no dispute regarding the exigibility of the service itself. The principle against double taxation applies, and the confirmation of the demand would unjustly require payment of the same tax twice - The demand for service tax on services rendered to SEZ units is set aside, and the appeal is allowed in favour of the appellant.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST Recent Updates: GSTAT, EWB...
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?