9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 438 - AAR - GSTWithdrawal of Advance Ruling application - Whether it is admissible to carry forward in GST Transition the un-availed CENVAT credit duties paid on capital goods received in the factory prior to 01 July 2017 and which are to be used in manufacturing activities? Held that - The request of the applicant to withdraw the application voluntarily and unconditionally is hereby allowed without going into the merits or detailed facts of this advance ruling application - application disposed off as withdrawn.
Issues involved: Application for advance ruling regarding the admissibility of carrying forward un-availed CENVAT credit duties paid on capital goods received before 01 July 2017 for manufacturing activities.
Analysis: The application was filed by Bauli India Bakes and Sweets Private Limited seeking an advance ruling on whether it is permissible to carry forward unutilized CENVAT credit duties paid on capital goods received before 01 July 2017 for use in manufacturing activities. The preliminary hearing took place on 03.07.2018, and the final hearing was scheduled for 25.07.2018. However, the applicant submitted a letter on 24.07.2018 requesting the withdrawal of the application filed on 23.05.2018. The applicant's request for voluntary and unconditional withdrawal of the application was granted without delving into the substantive merits or detailed facts of the advance ruling application by the Authority. The order issued under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 states that the application filed by M/s. Bauli India Bakes and Sweets Private Limited, referenced as ARA No. 28 dated 23.05.2018, is disposed of as withdrawn unconditionally. The Authority allowed the withdrawal of the application without further examination of the substantive issue raised in the advance ruling application. The decision to permit withdrawal without considering the merits of the case indicates that the Authority did not provide a ruling on the admissibility of carrying forward unutilized CENVAT credit duties paid on capital goods for manufacturing activities before the specified date.
|
