https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391475 Constitutional validity of paragraph 2 of Schedule II to the CGST and Goa GST Acts, read with the charging and supply provisions, was rejected because an earlier binding decision had already decided the issue against the petitioner. The challenge to the advance ruling and appellate advance ruling orders was not entertained while rectification proceedings under the CGST Act remained pending on the same subject. The court kept locus standi open and preserved liberty to file a fresh petition if those statutory proceedings did not provide relief. en-us Tue, 21 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Mar 2025 10:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391475 Constitutional validity of paragraph 2 of Schedule II to the CGST and Goa GST Acts, read with the charging and supply provisions, was rejected because an earlier binding decision had already decided the issue against the petitioner. The challenge to the advance ruling and appellate advance ruling orders was not entertained while rectification proceedings under the CGST Act remained pending on the same subject. The court kept locus standi open and preserved liberty to file a fresh petition if those statutory proceedings did not provide relief. Case-Laws GST Tue, 21 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391475