Fraudulently obtained SEIS scrips cannot support customs exemption; recovery, confiscation and penalties were sustained, but employee penalty fell awa...
An advance ruling application was held non-admissible because it sought to regularise a completed transaction: the prescribed fee had already been paid before the ruling request, so the matter lay outside the advance ruling mechanism. On taxability, the permission granted for conversion of wetland to dry land was treated as a specific regulatory service conferring a direct private benefit, making the statutory fee consideration for supply of service. The activity was held outside the functions entrusted to Panchayats under Article 243G and the Eleventh Schedule, so the claimed exemption failed. Accordingly, GST was held payable under reverse charge on the fee.
An advance ruling application was held non-admissible because it sought to regularise a completed transaction: the prescribed fee had already been paid before the ruling request, so the matter lay outside the advance ruling mechanism. On taxability, the permission granted for conversion of wetland to dry land was treated as a specific regulatory service conferring a direct private benefit, making the statutory fee consideration for supply of service. The activity was held outside the functions entrusted to Panchayats under Article 243G and the Eleventh Schedule, so the claimed exemption failed. Accordingly, GST was held payable under reverse charge on the fee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
