Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3381 to 3400 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
