Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The applicant sought ruling on eligibility for exemption under serial No. 3A of N/N. 9/2017-IT (Rate) as amended by N/N. 2/2018-IT (Rate) regarding dredging services supplied to Gujarat Maritime Board. The AAR determined that while Gujarat Maritime Board is a body corporate, the term "government entity" has been omitted from the exemption notification. The AAR ruled that the applicant is not eligible for the benefit claimed under the exemption notification. The Authority also noted that in accordance with Section 103 of the CGST Act, 2017, this advance ruling is binding only on the applicant who sought it.
The applicant sought ruling on eligibility for exemption under serial No. 3A of N/N. 9/2017-IT (Rate) as amended by N/N. 2/2018-IT (Rate) regarding dredging services supplied to Gujarat Maritime Board. The AAR determined that while Gujarat Maritime Board is a body corporate, the term "government entity" has been omitted from the exemption notification. The AAR ruled that the applicant is not eligible for the benefit claimed under the exemption notification. The Authority also noted that in accordance with Section 103 of the CGST Act, 2017, this advance ruling is binding only on the applicant who sought it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.