Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Objective characteristics govern magnesium bis-glycinate chelate classification as an amino-acid coordination compound, not a food preparation or anti...
Independent professional certification requires pleaded knowledge or complicity for criminal liability; untimely complaints remain barred by limitatio...
Healthcare services supplied by a clinical establishment through doctors, specialists and para-medical personnel were held exempt under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) read with the CBIC circular, because the substance of the arrangement was direct diagnosis, treatment and medical care to patients. The revenue-sharing structure did not convert the service into manpower supply or business support, and classification under SAC 9985 was rejected. The show cause notices seeking GST on exempt healthcare services were without jurisdiction and were quashed. The writ petitions were maintainable despite the alternative remedy objection because the notices proceeded on an erroneous denial of exemption and the foundational jurisdictional facts were absent.
Healthcare services supplied by a clinical establishment through doctors, specialists and para-medical personnel were held exempt under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) read with the CBIC circular, because the substance of the arrangement was direct diagnosis, treatment and medical care to patients. The revenue-sharing structure did not convert the service into manpower supply or business support, and classification under SAC 9985 was rejected. The show cause notices seeking GST on exempt healthcare services were without jurisdiction and were quashed. The writ petitions were maintainable despite the alternative remedy objection because the notices proceeded on an erroneous denial of exemption and the foundational jurisdictional facts were absent.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.