The ROM rejection order does not merge with the original advance ruling
Sec 100 of the CGST Act,2017-Advance Ruling- Admissibility of Application— In the instant case, Appellant is engaged in the business of property development i.e construction and sale of residential apartments. Appellant had executed projects under JDA with land owners for an agreed ratio of built-up area. Construction was commenced during pre-GST period and continued under GST regime.
The Appellant filed an application for advance ruling on 25-04-2018 before the Authority in terms of Section 97 of the CGST Act seeking a ruling on the question relating to applicability of tax on the work executed under a Joint Development Agreement with a land owner, where the work commenced before GST implementation and continued even after GST was implemented.
The Appellant made an application to the Authority for rectification of mistake (ROM) in the advance ruling.
The ROM application was filed on the grounds that the Authority had given a different ruling in their case when compared to the ruling given vide Order No 30/2018 dt 30-11-2018 in the case of advance ruling application filed by M/s Nforce Infrastructure when the facts and circumstances in both cases were the same. This ROM application was not admitted by the lower Authority and was rejected
Held that— we hold that the appeal filed against the ROM order is not maintainable in as much as the impugned order is not an appealable order under Section 100 of the CGST Act, 2017. We also hold that the ROM rejection order does not merge with the original advance ruling.
The ROM rejection order does not merge with the original advance ruling
Sec 100 of the CGST Act,2017-Advance Ruling- Admissibility of Application— In the instant case, Appellant is engaged in the business of property development i.e construction and sale of residential apartments. Appellant had executed projects under JDA with land owners for an agreed ratio of built-up area. Construction was commenced during pre-GST period and continued under GST regime.
The Appellant filed an application for advance ruling on 25-04-2018 before the Authority in terms of Section 97 of the CGST Act seeking a ruling on the question relating to applicability of tax on the work executed under a Joint Development Agreement with a land owner, where the work commenced before GST implementation and continued even after GST was implemented.
The Appellant made an application to the Authority for rectification of mistake (ROM) in the advance ruling.
The ROM application was filed on the grounds that the Authority had given a different ruling in their case when compared to the ruling given vide Order No 30/2018 dt 30-11-2018 in the case of advance ruling application filed by M/s Nforce Infrastructure when the facts and circumstances in both cases were the same. This ROM application was not admitted by the lower Authority and was rejected
Held that— we hold that the appeal filed against the ROM order is not maintainable in as much as the impugned order is not an appealable order under Section 100 of the CGST Act, 2017. We also hold that the ROM rejection order does not merge with the original advance ruling.