https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418580 The AAR, UP dismissed the application seeking advance ruling on supply of iron and steel to SEZ unit for manufacturing approved items. The Authority held that questions regarding zero-rated supply classification, refund entitlement on inputs, penalty liability for misuse by recipient, documentation requirements, and reverse charge mechanism liability were not covered under Section 97(2) of CGST Act, 2017. The Authority ruled that advance ruling can only be sought for supplies undertaken or proposed by the applicant, making the reverse charge mechanism question inadmissible. en-us Mon, 03 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Apr 2025 14:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418580 The AAR, UP dismissed the application seeking advance ruling on supply of iron and steel to SEZ unit for manufacturing approved items. The Authority held that questions regarding zero-rated supply classification, refund entitlement on inputs, penalty liability for misuse by recipient, documentation requirements, and reverse charge mechanism liability were not covered under Section 97(2) of CGST Act, 2017. The Authority ruled that advance ruling can only be sought for supplies undertaken or proposed by the applicant, making the reverse charge mechanism question inadmissible. Case-Laws GST Mon, 03 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418580