Case Law Details
Saisanket Enterprise Proprietor Milind Murudkar Vs Authority For Advance Ruling (Madhya Pradesh High Court)
Introduction: The case of Saisanket Enterprise, represented by Proprietor Milind Murudkar, involves a crucial aspect of GST advance rulings. The petitioner challenges the denial of an advance ruling by the Authority, citing procedural intricacies. The central contention revolves around the timing of the application and the proviso under Section 98(2) of the CGST/MPGST Act, 2017.
Detailed Analysis: The petitioner argues that the application for an advance ruling was submitted after a search operation revealed potential evasion of SGST, leading to a show-cause notice. The denial by the Authority and Appellate Authority is grounded in the proviso to Section 98(2), which prohibits the admission of applications on questions already pending or decided under GST provisions.
The petitioner’s non-payment of GST at 18% and the contestation of the show-cause notice are deemed as indications of a pending issue. As a result, authorities argue that the petitioner did not approach for an advance ruling in advance of the pending matter, justifying the denial.
Conclusion: The High Court dismisses the petition, emphasizing that the purpose of advance rulings is to address matters before the initiation of related proceedings. The timing of the application becomes critical, and the proviso under Section 98(2) serves as a barrier when issues are already in progress. The denial is justified, considering the petitioner’s failure to seek an advance ruling before the initiation of the pending GST issue.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
