<?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>2025 (6) TMI 1172 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773059</link>
    <description>Renting of immovable property by a religious body falls within the statutory exclusion from taxable service under the Finance Act, 1994. Applying Section 65(105)(zzzz) with the exclusion for religious bodies in Section 65(90a), the demand for service tax on rent received could not be sustained. The impugned demand and penalty therefore did not survive, and the appellant was not liable to pay service tax on the rent received.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=829836" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 1172 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773059</link>
      <description>Renting of immovable property by a religious body falls within the statutory exclusion from taxable service under the Finance Act, 1994. Applying Section 65(105)(zzzz) with the exclusion for religious bodies in Section 65(90a), the demand for service tax on rent received could not be sustained. The impugned demand and penalty therefore did not survive, and the appellant was not liable to pay service tax on the rent received.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773059</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>