Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96047 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.