Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The AAR held that the applicant's hotel will not qualify as a "specified premises" for FY 2025-26 because, for FY 2024-25, the per-room combined charge under the American or Continental Plan did not exceed Rs.7,500 per day; accordingly restaurant services to walk-in guests remain taxable under the ordinary rate applicable to standalone restaurant supply. The Authority further held that if in any subsequent financial year a unit of accommodation is charged at above Rs.7,500 (inclusive of food under the applicable plan, even if itemised), the premises will be treated as "specified premises" for the next financial year and restaurant services to walk-in guests will attract 9% CGST + 9% SGST.
The AAR held that the applicant's hotel will not qualify as a "specified premises" for FY 2025-26 because, for FY 2024-25, the per-room combined charge under the American or Continental Plan did not exceed Rs.7,500 per day; accordingly restaurant services to walk-in guests remain taxable under the ordinary rate applicable to standalone restaurant supply. The Authority further held that if in any subsequent financial year a unit of accommodation is charged at above Rs.7,500 (inclusive of food under the applicable plan, even if itemised), the premises will be treated as "specified premises" for the next financial year and restaurant services to walk-in guests will attract 9% CGST + 9% SGST.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
