https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415453 An advance ruling application was rejected because the statutory fee under the CGST and KGST Acts was not paid, and the applicant also sought withdrawal of the request. The Authority held that non-payment of the prescribed fee meant the application could not be admitted and was liable to rejection under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. The ruling therefore treated the unpaid fee as a threshold defect preventing consideration of the advance ruling request. en-us Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Mar 2025 12:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415453 An advance ruling application was rejected because the statutory fee under the CGST and KGST Acts was not paid, and the applicant also sought withdrawal of the request. The Authority held that non-payment of the prescribed fee meant the application could not be admitted and was liable to rejection under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. The ruling therefore treated the unpaid fee as a threshold defect preventing consideration of the advance ruling request. Case-Laws GST Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415453