CS Professional · Goods and Services Tax (GST) and Corporate Tax Planning · Assessment, Audit, Scrutiny, Demand and Recovery, Advance Ruling, Appeals and Revision
Which statement about how the CGST advance ruling provisions operate for integrated tax is correct?
They apply mutatis mutandis, so far as may be, as if enacted under the IGST Act. This means the CGST advance ruling provisions are adapted with necessary changes for integrated tax, subject to the IGST Act and its rules.
- AThey apply 'mutatis mutandis, so far as may be', as if enacted under the IGST ActCorrect
- BThey apply only after a separate notification for each ruling
- CThey apply only to the penalty under the IGST Act
- DThey apply without any modification whatsoever, whatever the context
Explanation
The section 20 wording is 'mutatis mutandis, so far as may be', as if enacted under the IGST Act, subject to that Act and its rules. This means necessary changes are made, which rules out application with no modification.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Assessment, Audit, Scrutiny, Demand and Recovery, Advance Ruling, Appeals and Revision shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Assessment, Audit, Scrutiny, Demand and Recovery, Advance Ruling, Appeals and Revision questions
- Under the GST law, which of the following is the correct position regarding the application of advance ruling provisions to integrated tax?
- Section 20 of the IGST Act lists matters of the CGST Act that apply to integrated tax. Which of the following is listed there together with …
- During scrutiny, an officer authorised under section 71 demands records from the person in charge of a registered person's place of business…
- Which of the following correctly states the position on how the IGST Act treats demands and recovery?
- Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017 applies the CGST Act provisions on audit and on inspection, search, seizure and arrest to integrated tax. H…
- A demand notice of ₹80 lakh was served on Meru Steels Ltd. In appeal, the dues were reduced to ₹50 lakh, while recovery proceedings on the o…