Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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.
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.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
