Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 455 (4.22 seconds)
Documents citing Union Of India vs M/S Intercontinental Consultants And ... on 7 March, 2018

North Star Shipping Services Pvt Ltd vs Cst Ch on 28 April, 2026

"18. Thus, the law of the land as laid down by the Apex Court in its decision in Union of India v Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt Ltd, 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC), puts it beyond the pale of any controversy that Section 67 which deals with valuation of taxable services for charging service tax does not provide for inclusion of the aforesaid expenditure or cost incurred while providing the services as they cannot be treated as element/components of service, till the amendment to Section 67 made effective from May 14, 2015. Concededly, the period involved in the present Appeals are from 01-04-2013 to 31-03-2015, and hence the aforesaid decision would squarely apply, rendering the entire demand confirmed in the impugned order unsustainable and liable to be set aside on this count alone."
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Delhi vs Kuehne & Nagel Pvt Ltd on 19 March, 2026

9. We find that the issue is no more res-integra in view of the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of UOI v Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt Ltd, 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC) which has considered the issue of liability to pay service tax on reimbursable expenses received by the service provider in the course of rendering services for the client, apart from the 12 ST/2380/2012, ST/56700/2013 consideration received for rendering the services on which the client has discharged the liability to pay service tax.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

New Era Travel And Cargo Agencies vs Service Tax - on 29 May, 2024

47. As regards the reimbursement of expenses is concerned, the learned Counsel submits that the expenses reimbursed cannot form part of taxable value in terms of Ruje 5(1) as it travels beyond the scope of Section 67. This position of law is faid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Lid (2018) 10 GSTL 401. She further submits that there is no finding in the impugned order with reference to the taxability of reimbursements. However the Show Cause Notice from para 5.2.0 up to 5.4.2 refers to the definition of CHA Services and Rule 5€1) & Rule 5(2) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 and states that expenditure or costs incurred by the service provider as the pure agent of the recipient alone is excluded. Therefore the Show Cause Notice proposes to demand service tax on the expenditure incurred while providing the CHA Services which is ist Ge Service Tax Appeal No.406 of 2012 squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats cited supra.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 52 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sivaram And Swamy vs Cst Ch - Ii on 17 April, 2026

9.10 Applying the ratio of the decisions relied upon by the appellant, particularly the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd., 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (S.C.), and taking note of Rule 6(1)(viii) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, it is held that such reimbursed expenses cannot be included in the taxable value and consequently the demand raised on such inclusion is liable to be set aside, which we accordingly do so. 10 Issue (ii): Sustainability of demand, interest and penalties 10.1 We find that the entire demand in the present case is based on inclusion of reimbursable expenses in the taxable value and, having held that such inclusion is not permissible in law, the very foundation of the demand does not survive; it is also well settled that service tax, being a levy on the value of taxable service, cannot be extended to amounts which do not constitute consideration for such service.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

J J Patel &Amp Brothers vs Surat-I on 11 April, 2022

It is seen that the contract puts the liability of expenditure of Service Tax on Gujarat Gas and they have also placed a separate meter for assessment of the actual electricity consumed. We find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Kiran Gems Pvt. Ltd. (supra) where after relying on the decision of Tribunal in the case of ICC Reality (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Commr. 2013 (32) S.T.R. 427 (Tribunal), Hotel Lake view Ashok vs. CGST 2018 TIOL 2195 CESTAT-Mad and S.B. Developers Ltd. vs. Commissioner 2018 TIOL 1866 CESTAT-Del., it was held that electricity charges reimbursed to the service provider by the service recipient are not includable in gross value of renting of immovable property service. We find that the said principle is equally applicable in the instant case. The said principle has also been pronounced by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (10) G.S.T.L 401 (SC). Accordingly, the appeal is allowed."
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Airlift Associates vs Cst Ch on 20 March, 2026

16. Thus, the law of the land as laid down by the Apex Court in its decision in Union of India v Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt Ltd, 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC), puts it beyond the pale of any controversy that Section 67 which deals with valuation of taxable services for charging service tax does not provide for inclusion of the aforesaid expenditure or cost incurred while providing the services as they cannot be treated as element/components of service, till the amendment to Section 67 made effective from May 14, 2015. Concededly, the period involved in the present Appeals are from 01-04-2013 to 31-03-2015, and hence the aforesaid decision would squarely apply, rendering the entire demand confirmed in the impugned order unsustainable and liable to be set aside on this count alone.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Airlift Associates vs Cst Ch on 20 March, 2026

16. Thus, the law of the land as laid down by the Apex Court in its decision in Union of India v Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt Ltd, 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC), puts it beyond the pale of any controversy that Section 67 which deals with valuation of taxable services for charging service tax does not provide for inclusion of the aforesaid expenditure or cost incurred while providing the services as they cannot be treated as element/components of service, till the amendment to Section 67 made effective from May 14, 2015. Concededly, the period involved in the present Appeals are from 01-04-2013 to 31-03-2015, and hence the aforesaid decision would squarely apply, rendering the entire demand confirmed in the impugned order unsustainable and liable to be set aside on this count alone.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Airlift Associates vs Cst Ch on 20 March, 2026

16. Thus, the law of the land as laid down by the Apex Court in its decision in Union of India v Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt Ltd, 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC), puts it beyond the pale of any controversy that Section 67 which deals with valuation of taxable services for charging service tax does not provide for inclusion of the aforesaid expenditure or cost incurred while providing the services as they cannot be treated as element/components of service, till the amendment to Section 67 made effective from May 14, 2015. Concededly, the period involved in the present Appeals are from 01-04-2013 to 31-03-2015, and hence the aforesaid decision would squarely apply, rendering the entire demand confirmed in the impugned order unsustainable and liable to be set aside on this count alone.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next