Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Select multiple courts at once.
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>SC upholds no GST on regulatory fees by CERC and DERC under Section 2(17) of CGST Act</h1> The SC dismissed the Special Leave Petitions challenging the levy of GST on regulatory fees collected by CERC and DERC. The Court upheld the HC's finding ... Levy of GST - Regulatory fees collected by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) and the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) - respondents have sought to draw a dichotomy between the “adjudicatory” and “regulatory” functions which these two statutory bodies discharge to essentially hold that the revenue earned from the latter would be subject to tax under the CGST and IGST Acts - It was held by High Court that the regulatory function discharged by Commissions would clearly not fall within the scope of the word 'business' as defined by Section 2 (17). HELD THAT:- There are no good ground to entertain these Special Leave Petitions. The Special Leave Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. The Supreme Court, with Justices J. B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan presiding, after hearing counsel for both parties, granted condonation of delay but found 'no good ground to entertain these Special Leave Petitions.' Consequently, the petitions were dismissed, and any pending applications were disposed of.