No Service Tax on Recovery of Cost incurred for VPN from Sub-Brokers

M/s Alankit Assignments Limited Vs CST (CESTAT New Delhi)

VPN was not made by the appellant by way of a support service for the sub-brokers. Evidently, there is no service provider – service receiver relationship between the appellant and the sub-brokers. A part of the cost involved in the VPN has been recovered from sub-brokers as their share of the expenditure. It appears to us that this is a cost-sharing arrangement and not in the form of a service provider-service receiver relationship. Consequently, we are of the view that there is no justificati

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.