Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
AAR held that nominal amounts recovered from employees for transportation arranged through third-party vendors did not constitute a supply under Section 7 of the CGST Act. The arrangement was treated as an employee welfare facility, not an activity in the course or furtherance of the applicant's engineering and IT-related business, and the recovery was only partial cost-sharing with no independent consideration accruing to the applicant. The transport facility was also regarded as an employment-linked perquisite covered by Schedule III, and therefore outside the ambit of supply. As the transaction was not taxable, the question of valuation for GST did not arise.
AAR held that nominal amounts recovered from employees for transportation arranged through third-party vendors did not constitute a supply under Section 7 of the CGST Act. The arrangement was treated as an employee welfare facility, not an activity in the course or furtherance of the applicant's engineering and IT-related business, and the recovery was only partial cost-sharing with no independent consideration accruing to the applicant. The transport facility was also regarded as an employment-linked perquisite covered by Schedule III, and therefore outside the ambit of supply. As the transaction was not taxable, the question of valuation for GST did not arise.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.