<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2003 (8) TMI 1 - CESTAT, Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105</link>
    <description>Receipt of Padakanika for use of a hall mainly for religious functions was treated as donation, not rent for social or commercial use. On that basis, the hall user was not regarded as a taxable Mandap Keeper under the Finance Act, 1994, because the amounts were not received for taxable social-function services. The contention that marriages and Brahmobadesams constituted social functions attracting service tax was rejected, and the service tax demand was held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 15:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39569" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (8) TMI 1 - CESTAT, Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105</link>
      <description>Receipt of Padakanika for use of a hall mainly for religious functions was treated as donation, not rent for social or commercial use. On that basis, the hall user was not regarded as a taxable Mandap Keeper under the Finance Act, 1994, because the amounts were not received for taxable social-function services. The contention that marriages and Brahmobadesams constituted social functions attracting service tax was rejected, and the service tax demand was held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>