Gujarat AAR declares advance ruling void ab initio due to suppression of material facts and misrepresentation by I Tech Plast India Pvt Ltd in GST case.
Discover the latest GST AAR ruling on Kohler India Corporation Pvt Ltd regarding ITC eligibility for canteen services under Factories Act, 1948. Get insights now!
The transaction of sale of goods by Tecnimont Pvt. Ltd. (TCMPL) to Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL) on High Seas Sale [HSS] basis in terms of Contract No. 44AC9100-EPCC-1 is covered under Entry N 8(b) of Schedule III of the CGST Act.
In re Unique Welding Products Pvt. Ltd (GST AAR Gujarat) Introduction: The integration of solar power systems has become a prevalent practice among businesses aiming to embrace sustainable and eco-friendly energy solutions. This article delves into a specific case, namely the ruling in the matter of Unique Welding Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. GST AAR Gujarat, […]
Cattle Feed Plant is an immovable property and supply of goods and services by the appellant for setting up and running of Cattle Feed Plant amounts to composite supply of works contract as defined in clause (119) of Section 2 of CGST Act, 2017
GST implications of incentives received under Atma Nirbhar Gujarat Sahay Yojna. Understand if it’s considered subsidy, its taxability, and GAAR ruling.
GST Appellate Authority upheld the key aspects of the Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling. AJL was not classified as a ‘Local Authority,’ and it was liable to pay GST on security and advertisement services. The requirement for GST registration as a deductor did not apply, and the attempt to be categorized as a ‘Government Entity’ or ‘Governmental Authority’ was dismissed.
Explore the GST implications of the contract between Tata Advanced Systems Ltd. and Airbus. Understand the nature of supply, tax classification, value determination, and time of supply for GST.
Get insights into GST implications on lease renewal and premium payments. Key rulings on Reverse Charge Mechanism, collection from shareholders, and more.
Applicant before us is not supplier of service and that ruling sought is not for admissibility of input tax credit in respect of supply received by applicant.
