<?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>2026 (3) TMI 339 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787584</link>
    <description>Application seeking an advance ruling on refund of accumulated input tax credit under the inverted duty structure was held inadmissible under Section 97(2) because the questions related to sanction and quantification of refunds under Section 54, which fall outside the categories available for advance rulings; accordingly the Authority rejected the application under Section 98(2) for lack of jurisdiction to adjudicate or quantify refund claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2026 07:53:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=889423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 339 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787584</link>
      <description>Application seeking an advance ruling on refund of accumulated input tax credit under the inverted duty structure was held inadmissible under Section 97(2) because the questions related to sanction and quantification of refunds under Section 54, which fall outside the categories available for advance rulings; accordingly the Authority rejected the application under Section 98(2) for lack of jurisdiction to adjudicate or quantify refund claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787584</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>