Case Law Details
In re Jaideep Ispat and Alloys Pvt. Ltd (GST AAAR Madhya Pradesh)
First proviso to section 98(2) of CGST Act, 2017 is very clear, that the authority shall not admit the application where the question raised in the application is already pending or decided in any proceedings in case of an applicant under any of provisions of this Act. The question raised by the appellant before us was investigated and adjudicated upon by the Circle-3, Commercial Tax Department (SGST), Indore. We find that Advance Ruling Authority has rightly rejected the appellant’s application as per the first proviso to section 98(2) of CGST Act, 2017.
AAAR held that section 100(1) mandates that only a ruling pronounced ender sub-section (4) of section 98 of CGST, Act, 2017 can be appealed before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling. AAAR find that the Advance Ruling Authority in its Order No.01/2021 has rejected the application of the appellant under section 98(2) of CGST, Act, 2017, and it cannot be said to be any advance ruling pronounced under sub-section (4) of section 98 of CGST Act, 2017, therefore the appellants appeal fails on this count also.
Read Also AAR: AAR cannot give ruling on technical/procedural issues
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MADHYA PRADESH
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
