Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The AAR ruled that organizing physical/offline games or tournaments of contract bridge played for money does not constitute supply of 'specified actionable claims' u/s 2(102A) of the GST Act, 2017. Contract bridge is predominantly a game of skill, not chance. The organizer neither provides an online platform nor retains any platform fee from players' contributions. The money contributed by players is deposited in a common pool, and the organizer has no lien over it. Organizing a tournament and allowing participation against a fee qualifies as supply of services by the organizer to participants. However, even if playing bridge for money is considered a 'specified actionable claim', the organizer cannot be deemed a supplier since they do not have control over the pooled money. Therefore, the organizer is not liable to pay GST for organizing physical/offline contract bridge tournaments played for money.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
