In re Sterlite Technologies Limited (GST AAR Maharashtra)
Authority for Advance Ruling 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 of the provisions of this Act” and further stating that in view of the express provisions given in the CGST Act, 2017 and Maharashtra GST Act, 2017, the application submitted by the taxpayer before the Authority for Advance Ruling, shall not be entertained and deserved to be rejected out rightly at the admission stage only.
The contention of the applicant that no proceedings can be stated to have been initiated against them until Show Cause Notice is issued to them is not tenable in view of the very clear position that Show Cause Notice is a form of charge memo/charge sheet filed which is a culmination of inquiry and investigations that have been undertaken in the case.
In view of the detailed factual position in respect of present case put before us it is very clear that proceedings under the relevant provisions of this Act are initiated in respect of the application prior to their filing of this application for Advance Ruling.
Thus the application filed by the applicant is not maintainable as per the provisions of Section 98 of the CGST Act, as proceedings are already initiated against them before the filing of their present application.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA
(under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
The present application has been filed under section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and MGST Act”] by Sterlite Technologies Limited, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions :-
1.1. Whether the Applicant is required to separately discharge GST on the excess length of OF although the cost of such excess length is already included in the price charged to independent customers?
1.2. Whether the Applicant is required to separately discharge GST on the excess length of OF although the cost of such excess length is already included in the price charged to distinct persons in terms of Schedule I provisions?
1.3. If GST is not payable separately on the excess length, whether the Company is required to reverse proportionate credit to the extent of supply such excess length?
At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provision under the MGST Act. Further to the earlier, henceforth for the purposes of this Advance Ruling, a reference to such a similar provision under the CGST Act / GST Act would be mentioned as being under the “GST Act”.
2. FACTS AND CONTENTION – AS PER THE APPLICANT
STATEMENT OF THE RELEVANT FACTS HAVING A BEARING ON THE QUESTION(S) ON WHICH THE ADVANCE RULING IS REQUIRED
