https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447269 CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of appellant hospital regarding service tax liability on amounts retained from doctor fees for infrastructure support. The tribunal held that such retained amounts are not liable for service tax, citing established precedents. Additionally, despite appellant's procedural lapse in not providing intimation for opting Rule 6(3A), the demand under Rule 6(3) was unsustainable since the correct amount was paid under Rule 6(3A). The tribunal emphasized that mere procedural non-compliance cannot justify demand when substantive compliance exists. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 20 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Dec 2023 11:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447269 CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of appellant hospital regarding service tax liability on amounts retained from doctor fees for infrastructure support. The tribunal held that such retained amounts are not liable for service tax, citing established precedents. Additionally, despite appellant's procedural lapse in not providing intimation for opting Rule 6(3A), the demand under Rule 6(3) was unsustainable since the correct amount was paid under Rule 6(3A). The tribunal emphasized that mere procedural non-compliance cannot justify demand when substantive compliance exists. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 20 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447269