Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96000 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AAR denied the rectification application, holding that rectification under Section 102 is permissible only for errors apparent on the face of the record and that no such error existed. The applicant sought insertion of a provision characterising body-building activity performed on a chassis owned by an unregistered customer as supply of services under SI No. 26(iv) / heading 998881 read with Schedule II; the AAR found the requested text redundant because the substance of that contention had already been addressed in the advance ruling. Consequently, the rectification petition was rejected as untenable under Section 98(2) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017.
The AAR denied the rectification application, holding that rectification under Section 102 is permissible only for errors apparent on the face of the record and that no such error existed. The applicant sought insertion of a provision characterising body-building activity performed on a chassis owned by an unregistered customer as supply of services under SI No. 26(iv) / heading 998881 read with Schedule II; the AAR found the requested text redundant because the substance of that contention had already been addressed in the advance ruling. Consequently, the rectification petition was rejected as untenable under Section 98(2) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
