<?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>Mutuality Doctrine Shields Club from Service Tax; Pure Agent Status and Threshold Exemption Also Apply</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86478</link>
    <description>CESTAT held that service tax demands against the appellant were unsustainable on multiple grounds. The doctrine of mutuality applies to club/association services, eliminating service provider-recipient relationship between an association and its members, following precedent in Ranchi Club Ltd. and Supreme Court&#039;s decision in State of West Bengal v. Calcutta Club Limited. The Business Auxiliary Services demand failed as authorities neither controverted appellant&#039;s &quot;pure agent&quot; claim nor specified which limb of the BAS definition applied. Regarding renting of immovable property, the taxable value (Rs.1,45,875/- for 2013-2014) fell below the threshold limit specified in Notification No.33/2012. Appeal allowed in toto.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:35:18 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:35:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=806176" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Mutuality Doctrine Shields Club from Service Tax; Pure Agent Status and Threshold Exemption Also Apply</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86478</link>
      <description>CESTAT held that service tax demands against the appellant were unsustainable on multiple grounds. The doctrine of mutuality applies to club/association services, eliminating service provider-recipient relationship between an association and its members, following precedent in Ranchi Club Ltd. and Supreme Court&#039;s decision in State of West Bengal v. Calcutta Club Limited. The Business Auxiliary Services demand failed as authorities neither controverted appellant&#039;s &quot;pure agent&quot; claim nor specified which limb of the BAS definition applied. Regarding renting of immovable property, the taxable value (Rs.1,45,875/- for 2013-2014) fell below the threshold limit specified in Notification No.33/2012. Appeal allowed in toto.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:35:18 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86478</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>