https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420327 The AAR rejected an application from a Telangana-registered taxpayer seeking clarification on whether registration in Maharashtra was required for renting immovable property located there. The applicant currently pays IGST on these interstate services. After examining the documents and conducting a personal hearing, the Authority determined that since the place of supply under IGST Act is where the immovable property is located (Maharashtra), the Telangana AAR lacked jurisdiction to rule on the matter. The application was admitted after fee payment and no objection from the jurisdictional officer, but ultimately rejected on jurisdictional grounds. en-us Tue, 29 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Apr 2025 15:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420327 The AAR rejected an application from a Telangana-registered taxpayer seeking clarification on whether registration in Maharashtra was required for renting immovable property located there. The applicant currently pays IGST on these interstate services. After examining the documents and conducting a personal hearing, the Authority determined that since the place of supply under IGST Act is where the immovable property is located (Maharashtra), the Telangana AAR lacked jurisdiction to rule on the matter. The application was admitted after fee payment and no objection from the jurisdictional officer, but ultimately rejected on jurisdictional grounds. Case-Laws GST Tue, 29 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420327