<?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>2007 (9) TMI 26 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2104</link>
    <description>Collection and forwarding of human blood, urine and stool samples by a collection centre was treated as outside business auxiliary service because the activity was limited to drawing, initial processing, preservation and transmission to a principal laboratory. The Court noted that the definition of technical testing and analysis is wide but expressly excludes testing or analysis in relation to human beings or animals, and that a specific exclusion cannot be overridden by recasting the same activity under a broader residuary category to sustain taxability. The incidental use of the principal&#039;s name did not convert the activity into promotion or marketing. The service was therefore held not taxable on the revenue&#039;s theory.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 17:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (9) TMI 26 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2104</link>
      <description>Collection and forwarding of human blood, urine and stool samples by a collection centre was treated as outside business auxiliary service because the activity was limited to drawing, initial processing, preservation and transmission to a principal laboratory. The Court noted that the definition of technical testing and analysis is wide but expressly excludes testing or analysis in relation to human beings or animals, and that a specific exclusion cannot be overridden by recasting the same activity under a broader residuary category to sustain taxability. The incidental use of the principal&#039;s name did not convert the activity into promotion or marketing. The service was therefore held not taxable on the revenue&#039;s theory.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2104</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>