Case Law Details
In re Shalby Limited (AAR GST Gujarat)
The applicant was aware of the investigation initiated and the proceedings initiated vide three GST DRC-01A Part A all dated 11-2-20. Yet it chose not to declare the same in the Advance Ruling Application dated 2-12-20 and mis-declared at said Sr. No. 17 Form GST ARA-01 dated 2-12-2020 of the said application. We notice that even the Revenue did not bring this misdeclaration by the applicant before the Authority prior to issuance of Ruling dated 20-1-21. However this does not shirk away the responsibility cast on the applicant.
Read AAAR Order: Advance ruling cannot be given if appellant mis-declared facts of initiation of proceedings
The applicant submitted that the Advance Ruling was not appealed by the State Revenue. The matter at present is not appeal issue as prescribed at section 100 of CGST Act, but the matter at hand to decide whether the Ruling may be declared void abinitio as prescribed at section 104 of the CGST Act. We hold that the Authority has been empowered vide Section 104 of CGST Act to declare a Ruling void abinitio. We hold that the Advance Ruling cannot be used as a mechanism to nullify and frustrate the inquiry proceedings already initiated vide section 70(1) of CGST Act. Further, we hold that Advance Ruling cannot be misused when GST DRC-01A has already been issued, even prior to filing of Advance Ruling application.
The applicant should bear in mind that the CGST Act has deemed this Authority to be a civil court for the purposes of section 195, but not for the purposes of Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and every proceeding before the Authority shall be deemed to be judicial proceeding within the meaning of sections 193 and 228, and for the purpose of section 196 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant has obtained said Advance Ruling dated 20-1-21 by suppressing the material facts.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
