Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1181 to 1200 of 96001 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 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
