<?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>2023 (1) TMI 918 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433171</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellants, M/s Jagdish Warehouse Owner Association and M/s Ravi Chambers Owner Association, in a dispute over liability for service tax under &quot;Renting of Immovable Property Services.&quot; The Appellants, who rented properties to State Bank of India, successfully argued that they were not the actual service providers as the properties were owned by individual owners who received rent separately. The Tribunal held that since the associations did not receive the rent and were not the absolute owners of the properties, the demand for service tax against them was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, and the service tax demand was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2023 11:04:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=702481" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 918 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433171</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellants, M/s Jagdish Warehouse Owner Association and M/s Ravi Chambers Owner Association, in a dispute over liability for service tax under &quot;Renting of Immovable Property Services.&quot; The Appellants, who rented properties to State Bank of India, successfully argued that they were not the actual service providers as the properties were owned by individual owners who received rent separately. The Tribunal held that since the associations did not receive the rent and were not the absolute owners of the properties, the demand for service tax against them was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, and the service tax demand was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433171</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>