<?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>Ayurvedic therapeutic treatment held outside health and fitness services, and exempt as health care services by a clinical establishment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100420</link>
    <description>Ayurvedic therapeutic treatment provided through a licensed hospital was held to fall outside the taxable category of Health and Fitness Services, because the records showed diagnosis, treatment and supervision by qualified medical practitioners using recognised Ayurvedic procedures, and the Revenue produced no contrary evidence. The pre-01.07.2012 demand was therefore unsustainable. For the post-01.07.2012 period, the Tribunal held that the appellant functioned as a clinical establishment rendering health care services in a recognised system of medicine, so the exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST applied. The post-01.07.2012 demands were accordingly not maintainable and the impugned orders were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:37 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905302" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Ayurvedic therapeutic treatment held outside health and fitness services, and exempt as health care services by a clinical establishment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100420</link>
      <description>Ayurvedic therapeutic treatment provided through a licensed hospital was held to fall outside the taxable category of Health and Fitness Services, because the records showed diagnosis, treatment and supervision by qualified medical practitioners using recognised Ayurvedic procedures, and the Revenue produced no contrary evidence. The pre-01.07.2012 demand was therefore unsustainable. For the post-01.07.2012 period, the Tribunal held that the appellant functioned as a clinical establishment rendering health care services in a recognised system of medicine, so the exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST applied. The post-01.07.2012 demands were accordingly not maintainable and the impugned orders were set aside.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:37 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>