Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Revenue-sharing arrangements with hospitals and Jamia Hamdard were treated as a joint venture with defined reciprocal obligations, so the appellant was not found to be rendering an independent taxable service to the other contracting party. Applying its earlier hospital-based decisions, the CESTAT held that the income from patients was shared under a common commercial arrangement and did not attract service tax on a principal-to-principal service basis. The service tax demand, interest and penalty were set aside, with consequential relief granted.
Revenue-sharing arrangements with hospitals and Jamia Hamdard were treated as a joint venture with defined reciprocal obligations, so the appellant was not found to be rendering an independent taxable service to the other contracting party. Applying its earlier hospital-based decisions, the CESTAT held that the income from patients was shared under a common commercial arrangement and did not attract service tax on a principal-to-principal service basis. The service tax demand, interest and penalty were set aside, with consequential relief granted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
