<?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>2018 (10) TMI 560 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368594</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the joint owners of a commercial complex in a dispute over service tax on total rents received. Citing previous Tribunal decisions, the Tribunal emphasized individual ownership rights, separate PAN numbers, and income tax assessments for each co-owner in determining service tax liability. It clarified that the concept of &quot;association of persons&quot; should not apply when co-owners receive rent proportionate to their share. Service tax should be charged based on the service provided, not physical demarcation of the property. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential benefits following established legal principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2018 09:12:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537855" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 560 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368594</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the joint owners of a commercial complex in a dispute over service tax on total rents received. Citing previous Tribunal decisions, the Tribunal emphasized individual ownership rights, separate PAN numbers, and income tax assessments for each co-owner in determining service tax liability. It clarified that the concept of &quot;association of persons&quot; should not apply when co-owners receive rent proportionate to their share. Service tax should be charged based on the service provided, not physical demarcation of the property. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential benefits following established legal principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368594</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>