https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791949 The AAR, Kerala held that an advance ruling application must relate to supplies undertaken by the applicant, and questions framed around services supplied by facilitators to the applicant were too vague and outside that scope. It also noted that the same subject matter had already been examined in earlier adjudication proceedings against the applicant, triggering the bar on admission under the CGST Act. As a result, the application was held not maintainable and no ruling was issued. The Authority therefore declined to consider the merits of mutuality, the deeming provision on member transactions, or the claimed exemption. en-us Mon, 23 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2026 08:31:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791949 The AAR, Kerala held that an advance ruling application must relate to supplies undertaken by the applicant, and questions framed around services supplied by facilitators to the applicant were too vague and outside that scope. It also noted that the same subject matter had already been examined in earlier adjudication proceedings against the applicant, triggering the bar on admission under the CGST Act. As a result, the application was held not maintainable and no ruling was issued. The Authority therefore declined to consider the merits of mutuality, the deeming provision on member transactions, or the claimed exemption. Case-Laws GST Mon, 23 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791949