Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether renting of premises used as hostel accommodation for students falls within the exemption for services by way of renting of residential dwelling for use as residence under Section 66D(m) of the Finance Act, 1994, and whether the refund claim was maintainable.
Analysis: The premises was rented to an educational foundation and was ultimately used for residence by students. The expression "renting of residential dwelling for use as residence" is an activity-specific exemption and does not require the lessee to occupy the premises as its own residence. The authority also noted that the proceedings turned on the correctness of the exemption claim and not on any separate objection that the assessment had not been challenged. The interpretative guidance in the TRU letter and the Supreme Court's ruling on similar language supported a broad construction of the exemption where the ultimate use remained residential.
Conclusion: The rental income was not liable to service tax, and the refund claim was maintainable. The issue is decided in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The exemption under Section 66D(m) applied to the impugned letting arrangement, and the denial of refund was set aside with consequential relief.
Ratio Decidendi: Where premises rented as residential accommodation are ultimately used as residence, the exemption is attracted irrespective of whether the occupant is the lessee or persons housed through the lessee, because the exemption is activity-specific and not person-specific.