<?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>2024 (7) TMI 1400 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756180</link>
    <description>Fees collected by a statutory regulatory body while discharging compulsory functions under the Architects Act, 1972 were treated as non-commercial regulatory receipts, not taxable service income. The Tribunal held that registration, recognition, inspection, regulation of architectural education, entrance testing, and allied statutory duties were performed without profit motive and without the quid pro quo associated with a commercial service. It applied Notification No. 25/2012-ST, including the exemptions for educational institutions and for services provided by a person other than a business entity, and held that the receipts remained within the service tax exemption. The demand and penalties were therefore not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2024 17:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=762103" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1400 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756180</link>
      <description>Fees collected by a statutory regulatory body while discharging compulsory functions under the Architects Act, 1972 were treated as non-commercial regulatory receipts, not taxable service income. The Tribunal held that registration, recognition, inspection, regulation of architectural education, entrance testing, and allied statutory duties were performed without profit motive and without the quid pro quo associated with a commercial service. It applied Notification No. 25/2012-ST, including the exemptions for educational institutions and for services provided by a person other than a business entity, and held that the receipts remained within the service tax exemption. The demand and penalties were therefore not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756180</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>