https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364079 A hospital's retention from patient collections under a revenue-sharing arrangement with consulting doctors was analysed as part of a mutually beneficial health care model, not as consideration for a distinct infrastructural support service. Because the agreements did not establish identifiable support in relation to business or commerce, and the hospital was providing exempt health care services, the retained share was treated as outside Business Support Service tax. Separately, service tax and interest paid on renting of immovable property before the show cause notice were treated as an admitted liability and could be appropriated against that obligation. en-us Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:13:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364079 A hospital's retention from patient collections under a revenue-sharing arrangement with consulting doctors was analysed as part of a mutually beneficial health care model, not as consideration for a distinct infrastructural support service. Because the agreements did not establish identifiable support in relation to business or commerce, and the hospital was providing exempt health care services, the retained share was treated as outside Business Support Service tax. Separately, service tax and interest paid on renting of immovable property before the show cause notice were treated as an admitted liability and could be appropriated against that obligation. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364079