Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Advance Ruling Authority rejected the application made by the applicant for pronouncement of ruling as the questions raised were not covered under any of the clauses of sub-section (2) of section 97 of the GST Act. The applicant had selected clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 97 but failed to refer to any relevant notification during the hearing. Despite being given reasonable opportunity, the applicant did not raise questions covered under any clause of sub-section (2) of section 97. The application was rejected as the questions were found not to be covered under the scope of Advance Ruling application for interpretation of provisions of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, or classification of goods and services for tax purposes.
The Advance Ruling Authority rejected the application made by the applicant for pronouncement of ruling as the questions raised were not covered under any of the clauses of sub-section (2) of section 97 of the GST Act. The applicant had selected clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 97 but failed to refer to any relevant notification during the hearing. Despite being given reasonable opportunity, the applicant did not raise questions covered under any clause of sub-section (2) of section 97. The application was rejected as the questions were found not to be covered under the scope of Advance Ruling application for interpretation of provisions of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, or classification of goods and services for tax purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
