<?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 (4) TMI 278 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789209</link>
    <description>Employer-provided passenger transport and canteen facilities made available to employees for consideration were treated as taxable supplies under GST, because the employer-to-employee exclusion in Schedule III applies only to services by an employee to the employer and does not cover the reverse arrangement. The transport service was also found not to qualify for exemption as non-air-conditioned contract carriage under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), since the arrangement was not shown to be a contract carriage service in the statutory sense. Input tax credit on both transport and canteen-related expenses was denied on the basis that the services were for employee consumption and fell within the credit restrictions applied by the Authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2026 08:53:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894950" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 278 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789209</link>
      <description>Employer-provided passenger transport and canteen facilities made available to employees for consideration were treated as taxable supplies under GST, because the employer-to-employee exclusion in Schedule III applies only to services by an employee to the employer and does not cover the reverse arrangement. The transport service was also found not to qualify for exemption as non-air-conditioned contract carriage under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), since the arrangement was not shown to be a contract carriage service in the statutory sense. Input tax credit on both transport and canteen-related expenses was denied on the basis that the services were for employee consumption and fell within the credit restrictions applied by the Authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>