TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x of paid reimbursable expenses - HELD THAT:- It is not a case of the Department that the appellant was availing inadmissible CENVAT Credit. The reimbursable expenses are not includible in the taxable value of the service provided by the Appellant. Therefore, the impugned orders are set aside - Appeal allowed. - Service Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2009 Service Tax Appeal No. 53 of 2010 , Service Tax Appeal No. 142 of 2011 - FINAL ORDER NO. 75218-75220/2023 - Dated:- 10-4-2023 - HON BLE SHRI ASHOK JINDAL , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON BLE SHRI RAJEEV TANDON , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) Dr. Samir Chakraborty, Senior Advocate Shri Suman Bhowmik , Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri A. Roy , Authorized representative for the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch has been affirmed by the Hon ble Apex Court reported in 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC). Therefore the issue is no more res integra. In view of this, the impugned orders are to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the Ld.Authorized Representative for the Department submits that the larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Sri Bhagavathy Traders vs. CCE, Cochin [2011 (24) STR 290 (Tr.-LB)] has defined what are the reimbursements and as same is required to be included in the assessable value. He further submitted that the Appellant paid Service Tax on these services and taken CENVAT Credit thereof. Therefore these reimbursable expenses are none other part of the service provided of the Appellant. Therefore Service Tax is rightly demanded by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to charge. Sub-section (4) of Section 67 which enables the determination of the value of the taxable service in such manner as may be prescribed is expressly made subject to the provisions of sub-section (1). The thread which runs through Sections 66, 67 and Section 94, which empowers the Central Government to make rules for carrying out the provisions of Chapter V of the Act is manifest, in the sense that only the service actually provided by the service provider can be valued and assessed to service tax. We are, therefore, undoubtedly of the opinion that Rule 5(1) of the Rules runs counter and is repugnant to Sections 66 and 67 of the Act and to that extent it is ultra vires. It purports to tax not what is due from the service provider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es, 2006. 9. The arguments advanced by the Ld.Authorized Representative for the Department that the Appellant has taken CENVAT Credit on the services tax of paid reimbursable expenses. Therefore, the same is to be includible in the assessable value. We find that the said argument is not of any help to the Ld.Authorized Representative for the Department as it is not a case of the Department that the appellant was availing inadmissible CENVAT Credit. Therefore, the said argument is turned down. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the reimbursable expenses are not includible in the taxable value of the service provided by the Appellant. Therefore, the impugned orders are set aside. In the result, the Appeals are allowed with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
