<?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 (6) TMI 487 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438913</link>
    <description>Treatment of patients suffering from substance use disorder as out-patients was held not to qualify for exemption under entry 74(a) of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate). The Authority found that the outpatient model involved registration, counselling, examination, prescription and dispensing of medicines, but the medicines supplied to out-patients were a separate taxable supply and were not shown to be so integrated with counselling as to form a composite supply of health care services. It further held that, on the facts presented, substance use disorder treatment did not fall within the notification&#039;s definition of health care services. The exemption was therefore unavailable and the answer to the question was in the negative.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 13:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=716255" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (6) TMI 487 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438913</link>
      <description>Treatment of patients suffering from substance use disorder as out-patients was held not to qualify for exemption under entry 74(a) of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate). The Authority found that the outpatient model involved registration, counselling, examination, prescription and dispensing of medicines, but the medicines supplied to out-patients were a separate taxable supply and were not shown to be so integrated with counselling as to form a composite supply of health care services. It further held that, on the facts presented, substance use disorder treatment did not fall within the notification&#039;s definition of health care services. The exemption was therefore unavailable and the answer to the question was in the negative.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438913</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>