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 : Odisha AAR held that questions relating to refund of accumulated ITC under Section 54(3) are not maintainable under the advance ru...
Custom Duty : CAAR classified complete prosthetic joints as artificial joints and held the imported implants ineligible for exemption under Noti...
Custom Duty : CAAR held ITC (HS) code matching is not mandatory for DFIA imports if goods match DFIA description and satisfy Notification 25/202...
Custom Duty : CAAR ruled that matching ITC (HS) codes is unnecessary if imported goods match the DFIA description and comply with quantity and v...
Custom Duty : CAAR held that exported resultant goods qualify for proportionate duty remission under the MOOWR framework despite domestic sale o...
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...
The Gujarat AAR refused to answer questions regarding documentary proof and invoice endorsement for SEZ zero-rated supplies. The Authority held that such issues do not fall within the categories permitted under Section 97 of the CGST Act.
The Gujarat AAR held that AAC bricks cannot be classified under Chapter 69 as ceramic products because the autoclaving process does not satisfy the firing requirement prescribed for ceramic goods. The ruling classified AAC bricks under Heading 6810 as articles of cement or concrete.
Gujarat AAR held that ITC on construction of a concrete VCV tower used for EHV cable manufacturing is admissible because the structure functions as foundational and structural support for plant and machinery under Section 17 of the CGST Act.
The Gujarat AAR held that black mineral water containing added minerals but no sugar, sweeteners, or flavouring is classifiable under HSN 22011010. The ruling confirms applicability of 5% GST under Entry 146 of Notification No. 09/2025.
Gujarat AAR held that input tax credit on goods and services used for constructing a CCV Tower was admissible as the structure formed an essential structural support for manufacturing machinery. The ruling clarified that such support systems are covered within “plant and machinery” under Section 17(5) of the CGST Act.
CAAR Mumbai refused to entertain an advance ruling application on roasted areca nuts after noting that the classification issue had already been decided by the Madras High Court. The Authority applied the statutory bar under Section 28-I(2)(b) of the Customs Act.
CAAR Mumbai rejected an advance ruling application after holding that the classification issue relating to roasted areca nuts had already been decided by the Madras High Court. The Authority applied the statutory bar under Section 28-I(2)(b) of the Customs Act.7
The Customs Authority for Advance Ruling held that the classification dispute concerning roasted betel and areca nuts had already been decided in earlier court proceedings. The applications were therefore rejected as barred by law.
The Authority observed that the core element of the transaction was the grant of a non-exclusive right to access Coursera’s proprietary digital platform. It ruled that the supply involved licensing of intellectual property rather than educational services.
CAAR Mumbai held that imported elevator parts lacking guide rails, structural supports, and enclosure systems could not be classified as complete elevators under Rule 2(a). The authority ruled that the imports only represented parts and sub-assemblies requiring separate tariff classification.
