Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Tools on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
By creating an account you can:
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
Yes. As per notification no. 27/2009 - ST dated 20-8-2009, a government company can apply for a advance ruling. In case of a subsidiary of government company, he is also allowed to apply for a advance ruling. In the case of GSPL India Transco Ltd. [2012 (8) TMI 753 - Gujarat High Court], it was held that in the affidavit in reply it is not disputed by the respondents that the petitioners are Government Companies. However, from the statutory illustration and section 4(1)(c) read with section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956, it is clearly established that the petitioners are Government Companies being subsidiaries of Gujarat State Petronet Ltd. The holding company and each subsidiary company are separate and distinct legal entities and every company has an independent right to file an application before the AAR for pronouncement of an advance ruling on the questions raised in the applications. Section 96A(b)(ii) and (iii) support the case of the petitioners that a joint venture company could be an applicant. Further a resident falling within the class of mentioned in sub-clause (iii) could also maintain an application. The petitioners fall within the ambit of section 96A(b)(iii), therefore, we hold that the petitioners being a step-down subsidiary company of a Government Company are covered within the definition of the "applicant" in terms of section 96A(b) of the Finance Act. The applications filed by the petitioners before the AAR under section 96C were maintainable.
Government company eligibility for advance ruling confirmed; subsidiaries retain separate legal personality and may also apply. A government company is eligible to apply for an advance ruling and a subsidiary of a government company may also file because the holding company and each subsidiary are separate legal entities with independent rights to apply; a step-down subsidiary falls within the definition of an applicant, rendering its advance-ruling application maintainable.Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
TaxTMI