https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420046 The AAR rejected a job work service provider's application seeking rulings on retrospectively issued GST invoices for FY 17-19 services. The Authority determined the application was not maintainable under Section 97(2) of CGST Act as it primarily concerned invoice validity rather than tax liability or ITC admissibility. During proceedings, the applicant withdrew questions about tax recovery from principal suppliers and ITC eligibility for recipients. The AAR clarified that even if ruled upon, any decision would bind only the applicant and its jurisdictional officer, not its customers. en-us Mon, 07 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Apr 2025 17:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420046 The AAR rejected a job work service provider's application seeking rulings on retrospectively issued GST invoices for FY 17-19 services. The Authority determined the application was not maintainable under Section 97(2) of CGST Act as it primarily concerned invoice validity rather than tax liability or ITC admissibility. During proceedings, the applicant withdrew questions about tax recovery from principal suppliers and ITC eligibility for recipients. The AAR clarified that even if ruled upon, any decision would bind only the applicant and its jurisdictional officer, not its customers. Case-Laws GST Mon, 07 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420046