Amendment of advance ruling record cannot substitute a different foreign company where the application named another entity.

Rule 20 of the Authority for Advance Rulings (Procedure) Rules, 1996 permits amendment only to correct a factual or material error in the record; it does not allow substitution of one foreign company for another where that would change the entity on which the advance ruling application was founded. As the papers identified the Dubai company and the material did not establish that it was the same as the Mauritius company or merely its branch, the requested substitution would have altered the basis of the taxability question. The amendment application was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether Rule 20 of the Authority for Advance Rulings (Procedure) Rules, 1996 permits amendment of the record so as to substitute one foreign company for another in the application for advance ruling.

Analysis: Rule 20 permits amendment only where there is a factual or material error in the record. The request sought not a correction of description but substitution of an apparently different company, and the material before the Authority did not establish that the Dubai entity and the Mauritius entity were the same or that one was merely a branch of the other. Since the agreement and accompanying papers named the Dubai company, substitution of a different entity would alter the basis on which the taxability question was raised.

Conclusion: The application for amendment was misconceived and was rejected. The request to substitute the company was not permitted.

---