<?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>2026 (1) TMI 954 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785198</link>
    <description>Service tax assessment on a registered charitable institution was examined for commercial training, renting of immovable property and miscellaneous receipts; the institution&#039;s bona fide belief in exemption under the Mega Exemption notification was held credible and its charitable objective and utilization of receipts for welfare accepted, leading to rejection of tax demands on training and miscellaneous income. Renting income entries did not incontrovertibly establish taxable activity given absence of organized tariff and use for community programmes, so demands could not be sustained. Invocation of the extended limitation period was not justified in the absence of concealment and was disallowed. Appeal allowed and impugned order quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2026 06:31:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=879912" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 954 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785198</link>
      <description>Service tax assessment on a registered charitable institution was examined for commercial training, renting of immovable property and miscellaneous receipts; the institution&#039;s bona fide belief in exemption under the Mega Exemption notification was held credible and its charitable objective and utilization of receipts for welfare accepted, leading to rejection of tax demands on training and miscellaneous income. Renting income entries did not incontrovertibly establish taxable activity given absence of organized tariff and use for community programmes, so demands could not be sustained. Invocation of the extended limitation period was not justified in the absence of concealment and was disallowed. Appeal allowed and impugned order quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785198</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>