https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170625 Rule 165(8) of the Karnataka VAT Rules bars admission of an advance ruling application where the same question is already pending before departmental authorities, and section 60 of the Karnataka VAT Act confirms that the mechanism operates before the issue is taken up for departmental adjudication. Here, notices were issued, inspection and audit were completed, reassessment was recommended, and tax was demanded and paid under protest, showing that the exemption question was already seized by the authorities. The application was therefore not maintainable, and rejection was justified. en-us Mon, 02 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 May 2015 15:00:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170625 Rule 165(8) of the Karnataka VAT Rules bars admission of an advance ruling application where the same question is already pending before departmental authorities, and section 60 of the Karnataka VAT Act confirms that the mechanism operates before the issue is taken up for departmental adjudication. Here, notices were issued, inspection and audit were completed, reassessment was recommended, and tax was demanded and paid under protest, showing that the exemption question was already seized by the authorities. The application was therefore not maintainable, and rejection was justified. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 02 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170625