<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (2) TMI 875 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434360</link>
    <description>The AAR West Bengal rejected an advance ruling application filed by a service recipient seeking exemption from GST on upfront premium for land leasing services under entry 41 of Notification No. 12/2017. The Authority held that GST exemptions are intended for suppliers, not recipients, as suppliers are responsible for accounting outward exempt supplies to determine aggregate turnover and claim exemptions. Since the applicant was a service recipient rather than supplier, and any ruling would only bind the recipient and jurisdictional officers but not the supplier, the application was deemed inappropriate and rejected for lack of maintainability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2025 12:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=705393" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 875 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434360</link>
      <description>The AAR West Bengal rejected an advance ruling application filed by a service recipient seeking exemption from GST on upfront premium for land leasing services under entry 41 of Notification No. 12/2017. The Authority held that GST exemptions are intended for suppliers, not recipients, as suppliers are responsible for accounting outward exempt supplies to determine aggregate turnover and claim exemptions. Since the applicant was a service recipient rather than supplier, and any ruling would only bind the recipient and jurisdictional officers but not the supplier, the application was deemed inappropriate and rejected for lack of maintainability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434360</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>