Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Ayurvedic therapeutic treatment provided through a licensed hospital was held to fall outside the taxable category of Health and Fitness Services, because the records showed diagnosis, treatment and supervision by qualified medical practitioners using recognised Ayurvedic procedures, and the Revenue produced no contrary evidence. The pre-01.07.2012 demand was therefore unsustainable. For the post-01.07.2012 period, the Tribunal held that the appellant functioned as a clinical establishment rendering health care services in a recognised system of medicine, so the exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST applied. The post-01.07.2012 demands were accordingly not maintainable and the impugned orders were set aside.
Ayurvedic therapeutic treatment provided through a licensed hospital was held to fall outside the taxable category of Health and Fitness Services, because the records showed diagnosis, treatment and supervision by qualified medical practitioners using recognised Ayurvedic procedures, and the Revenue produced no contrary evidence. The pre-01.07.2012 demand was therefore unsustainable. For the post-01.07.2012 period, the Tribunal held that the appellant functioned as a clinical establishment rendering health care services in a recognised system of medicine, so the exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST applied. The post-01.07.2012 demands were accordingly not maintainable and the impugned orders were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.