<?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 (8) TMI 4 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775817</link>
    <description>The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that service tax on short-term accommodation service applies only from 01.05.2011, and demands for earlier periods under &quot;Club or Association Service&quot; were unsustainable. The appellant was entitled to abatement under Notification 1/2006-ST, as they did not violate its conditions. Refundable security deposits were held not to be consideration for service and thus outside service tax scope. Demands based on closing balances of advances, pre-receipt income, sundry debtors, and miscellaneous income (sale of scrap) were set aside due to improper tax basis or non-service transactions. Charges for dispensing and enlistment were not taxable as business auxiliary services, and sale of property was not a taxable service. All contested demands were dropped, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2025 08:15:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=840111" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 4 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775817</link>
      <description>The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that service tax on short-term accommodation service applies only from 01.05.2011, and demands for earlier periods under &quot;Club or Association Service&quot; were unsustainable. The appellant was entitled to abatement under Notification 1/2006-ST, as they did not violate its conditions. Refundable security deposits were held not to be consideration for service and thus outside service tax scope. Demands based on closing balances of advances, pre-receipt income, sundry debtors, and miscellaneous income (sale of scrap) were set aside due to improper tax basis or non-service transactions. Charges for dispensing and enlistment were not taxable as business auxiliary services, and sale of property was not a taxable service. All contested demands were dropped, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775817</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>