https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415455 An advance ruling application under the CGST Act and Karnataka GST Act was not maintainable because the prescribed fee had not been paid under both enactments; payment under only one enactment was insufficient for a valid filing. The applicant also sought withdrawal on the ground that clarification was no longer required, but the authority held that the defect went to maintainability at the threshold, so the application could not be examined on merits and was rejected. en-us Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Mar 2025 12:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415455 An advance ruling application under the CGST Act and Karnataka GST Act was not maintainable because the prescribed fee had not been paid under both enactments; payment under only one enactment was insufficient for a valid filing. The applicant also sought withdrawal on the ground that clarification was no longer required, but the authority held that the defect went to maintainability at the threshold, so the application could not be examined on merits and was rejected. Case-Laws GST Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415455