https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421672 The AAR rejected an application by a construction company seeking clarification on whether tax should be calculated on or inclusive of tender price. The authority found the application non-maintainable as the applicant failed to demonstrate that the supply in question was ongoing or proposed at the time of filing, as required under Section 95(a) of the CGST Act. Despite a virtual hearing where the applicant was present, the submission lacked essential details and clarity. The revenue authority did not submit comments or appear for the hearing. en-us Tue, 12 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Apr 2025 14:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421672 The AAR rejected an application by a construction company seeking clarification on whether tax should be calculated on or inclusive of tender price. The authority found the application non-maintainable as the applicant failed to demonstrate that the supply in question was ongoing or proposed at the time of filing, as required under Section 95(a) of the CGST Act. Despite a virtual hearing where the applicant was present, the submission lacked essential details and clarity. The revenue authority did not submit comments or appear for the hearing. Case-Laws GST Tue, 12 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421672