The application for advance ruling cannot be admitted where the question raised in the application is already pending or decided in any proceedings in the case of an applicant. Therefore the advance ruling pronounced by the Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling is liable to be declared as void ab-initio.
Advance Ruling— section 98 of CGST Act— The present appeal has been filed against the Advance Ruling of Gujarat advance ruling authority.
The appellant had “ticked” both the items (a) and (b) of column 17 of Form GST ARA-01, in the application filed before the GAAR in Form GST ARA-01, meaning that the question raised in the application is neither already pending nor already decided in any proceedings in applicant’s case under any of the provisions of the Act. However, when the officers of the DGGI Surat had visited the premises of the appellant and recorded the statement of the partners, and proceedings related to question raised in the application for advance ruling was already pending when the application for advance ruling was filed before the GAAR, then the appellant should not have “ticked” the item (a) of column 17 of Form GST ARA-01.
Held that— From the facts and records, this authority is of the view that the appellant has obtained the Advance Ruling by submitting application of advance ruling with suppression of material facts or misrepresentation of facts, and the application was not eligible to be admitted in view of proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 98 of the CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, in terms of Section 104 of CGST Act, 2017, and the GGST Act, 2017, the advance ruling pronounced by the Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling is liable to be declared as void ab-initio.
The application for advance ruling cannot be admitted where the question raised in the application is already pending or decided in any proceedings in the case of an applicant. Therefore the advance ruling pronounced by the Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling is liable to be declared as void ab-initio.
Advance Ruling— section 98 of CGST Act— The present appeal has been filed against the Advance Ruling of Gujarat advance ruling authority.
The appellant had “ticked” both the items (a) and (b) of column 17 of Form GST ARA-01, in the application filed before the GAAR in Form GST ARA-01, meaning that the question raised in the application is neither already pending nor already decided in any proceedings in applicant’s case under any of the provisions of the Act. However, when the officers of the DGGI Surat had visited the premises of the appellant and recorded the statement of the partners, and proceedings related to question raised in the application for advance ruling was already pending when the application for advance ruling was filed before the GAAR, then the appellant should not have “ticked” the item (a) of column 17 of Form GST ARA-01.
Held that— From the facts and records, this authority is of the view that the appellant has obtained the Advance Ruling by submitting application of advance ruling with suppression of material facts or misrepresentation of facts, and the application was not eligible to be admitted in view of proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 98 of the CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, in terms of Section 104 of CGST Act, 2017, and the GGST Act, 2017, the advance ruling pronounced by the Gujarat Authority of Advance Ruling is liable to be declared as void ab-initio.