TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an application for advance ruling under the GST enactments could be entertained when the prescribed fee had not been paid in full.
Analysis: The application for advance ruling under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is required to be accompanied by the prescribed fee. The applicable fee was Rs. 5,000 under the CGST head and Rs. 5,000 under the SGST head, as prescribed by the relevant rules. Since the application was not accompanied by the total requisite fee of Rs. 10,000, the statutory requirement for maintainability was not satisfied. The Authority was therefore justified in declining to admit the application under the provision empowering admission or rejection after examination of the records and hearing.
Conclusion: The application was liable to be rejected for non-payment of the prescribed fee.
Final Conclusion: The advance ruling request did not satisfy the statutory filing requirements and was not entertained.
Ratio Decidendi: An advance ruling application must be accompanied by the full prescribed fee under the governing GST enactments, and non-payment of that fee justifies rejection at the threshold.
TaxTMI 
