Case Law Details
In re The Indian Hume Pipe Company Limited (GST AAR Andhra Pradesh)
It is observed by the members of the authority for advance ruling that, audit was initiated by the jurisdictional authority under section 65 of the CGST act, 2017 and APGST act 2017,to verify all the issues regarding the business activities of the applicant and also issued a notice to them in ADT-01 on 29-09-2021 and therefore their case falls under the first proviso to Sec 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 wherein their application is liable to be rejected as the question raised by them in the application is pending or decided in such proceedings before the audit officer.
The first proviso under Section 98(2) reads as follows: “Provided that the authority shall not admit the application where the question raised In the application is already pending or decided in any proceedings In the case of an applicant under any provisions of this Act”. Thus If the question raised Is pending or decided in any proceedings pertaining to the applicant the authority shall refuse to admit such application.
In the present case, the audit officer has Issued a notice in ADT-01 on 29-09-2021, while the application for advance ruling was filed on 06.09.2022. The application before the AAR was filed after the audit officer has initiated proceedings and this issue was not brought to the notice of the members while filing the application nor during the personal hearing. Thus as the proceedings are pending, when the application was flied before the advance ruling authority under chapter XIII of the CGST Act, 2017 regarding the question raised by the applicant, their application stands rejected.
Read AAAR Order: Utttar Pradesh Jal Nigam is not a Local authority; 18% GST applicable on works contract services
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
