Ruling passed by Authority for Advance Rulings Customs , Central Excise & Service Tax. The Authority for Advance Rulings consists of a Chairman who is a retired Judge of the Supreme court and two members of the rank of Additional Secretary to the Government of India, one each from the Indian Revenue Service and the Indian Legal Service.
Goods and Services Tax : Scenario-wise analysis of GST on business canteen services covering ITC, employee recovery, contractor supply, and statutory oblig...
Goods and Services Tax : The ruling examines the composition of lime products and holds that impurities of 10–15% place them under Heading 2522. The Auth...
Goods and Services Tax : Gujarat AAAR rules ITC from one business can offset GST on unrelated output supplies under a single registration, emphasizing fung...
Goods and Services Tax : जीएसटी के तहत एडवांस रूलिंग (AAR) की प्रक्रिया, प्रा...
CA, CS, CMA : Stay informed on India's latest regulatory changes from June 16-22, 2025. This summary covers Income Tax exemptions, GST amendment...
Goods and Services Tax : New functionality to search for GST Advance Ruling Orders issued by Authority / Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling on GST Por...
Goods and Services Tax : Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) constituted under the provisions of a SGST/ UTGST Act, in terms of the provisions of Section 96...
Goods and Services Tax : The Kerala AAR held that advance ruling applications cannot be based on hypothetical scenarios or academic questions. The Authorit...
Goods and Services Tax : The Kerala AAR held that medicines, consumables, room rent, and ancillary services provided during inpatient treatment form part o...
Goods and Services Tax : Kerala AAR held that used gunny bags sold after cattle feed manufacturing are reusable packing bags under HSN 6305 and not scrap. ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Kerala AAR rejected an advance ruling application after noting that the issue of GST applicability on member transactions had ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Authority ruled that the President and Members of the statutory temple board are not “directors” under GST notifications. ...
Goods and Services Tax : Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Authority makes changes in its lineup, appointing Shri. Ajaykumar Vaman Bonde as a member of Ad...
Goods and Services Tax : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan has been appointed as member of Maharashtra Advance Ruling Authority in the place of Mr. Rajiv Magoo. FINANCE DEP...
Goods and Services Tax : Governor of Himachal Pradesh, in supersession of this department’s notification of even No. dated 14.09.2020, published in the e...
Goods and Services Tax : Governor of Delhi under Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is pleased to reconstitute the Delhi Authority for Advance Ruling...
Goods and Services Tax : Shri. Rajiv Magoo, Joint Commissioner of Central Tax has been appointed as member of Maharashtra GST Advance Ruling Committee in t...
CFTI cannot be considered as an institute or establishment which is specifically excluded from the definition of “commercial coaching and training centre” under section 65(27) of the Finance Act, 1994; it also cannot be considered as a “vocational training institute” for the purpose of exemption from service tax under the category of “commercial training and coaching service” in terms of Notification No. 24/2004-ST, dated 10.9.2004.
On the facts and circumstances of this case, we do not think that the proceedings in connection with the earlier application shall now be reopened and a decisive answer to the question should be given at this stage.
Hence, no income from offshore supplies accrues or arises or can be deemed to accrue or arise to the Applicant in India under the Indian Tax Law (ITL). The AAR also ruled that the Applicant does not have a Permanent Establishment (PE) in relation to offshore supplies. Therefore, no part of income from offshore supplies can be said to be taxable in India.
AAR Ruling: Referral fee received from an Indian based recruitment agency by a non-resident is not liable to tax in India in view of the provisions of India-UK Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement [Real Resourcing Limited (AAR No. 828 of 2009)].
The AAR held that the fee received by US Co from the Applicant is in the nature of business profits of US Co and the same is not taxable in India in the absence of US Co constituting a permanent establishment (PE) in India under the India-US tax treaty (Tax Treaty). Further, the Applicant is not required to withhold taxes under the Indian Tax Law (ITL) while making remittance to US Co as it has not derived any income chargeable to tax in India.
KSPG Netherlands Holding B.V. (applicant), is a company incorporated in Netherlands on November 6, 2008 with its registered office in Amsterdam. PG India is the private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on October 26, 2006, which was held by Pierburg GmbH until November 2008. During November 2008, Pierburg GmbH
Seagate Singapore International Headquarters Pvt. Ltd. (applicant) was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of Hard Disk Drives (disks). It has been supplying disks to Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) in India. In order to minimize the delays in the procurement of inputs from the applicant, the OEM proposed to put in place a Vendor Managed Inventory (VMI) model. Under the VMI model,
The Authority of Advance Rulings (AAR) has ruled that fees received by a foreign company for assigning contractual rights to an Indian entity is not taxable in India. The ruling of the AAR –– a quasi-judicial forum deciding queries on matters of international taxation — came on a query from an Indian company that had paid a foreign company for assigning part of a global contract with Nokia Corporation for supplying equipment.
AAR Ruling: The amount received on account of assignment of rights, title, interest, obligations and duties in connection with the supply of products is not taxable in India in the absence of a Permanent Establishment and therefore, tax is not required to be withheld under section 195 of the Income tax Act while making remittance outside India [Laird Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. (AAR No. 793/ 2008)(2010-TIOL-06-ARA-IT)].
An individual who resides in India for a period of less than 182 days during the previous year and is residing outside India for the purpose of employment, then irrespective of the fact of his presence in India for the period of 365 days or more during the preceding 4 previous years, he cannot be treated as a resident of India for the purpose of taxing his salary income
