https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368338 The AAR held that its advance ruling jurisdiction was limited to registered persons within the State and could not extend to applicants registered in other States, so the application concerning bauxite supplies from captive mines outside Uttar Pradesh was not maintainable and was rejected. It also noted that the request concerned the requirement to issue tax invoices for each consignment under the GST law, but declined to answer that substantive question because territorial jurisdiction was absent. en-us Fri, 04 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Mar 2025 14:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368338 The AAR held that its advance ruling jurisdiction was limited to registered persons within the State and could not extend to applicants registered in other States, so the application concerning bauxite supplies from captive mines outside Uttar Pradesh was not maintainable and was rejected. It also noted that the request concerned the requirement to issue tax invoices for each consignment under the GST law, but declined to answer that substantive question because territorial jurisdiction was absent. Case-Laws GST Fri, 04 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368338