2019 (8) TMI 28 - AAR - GST

Scope of Advance Ruling - lack of Jurisdiction - Requirement of E-way bill - consignments pertaining to multiple invoices to multiple customers moved in the same conveyance - the value of each invoice is less than the limits for generation of e-way bill but in aggregate, the value of the multiple invoices exceeds the specified limit - HELD THAT - The Act limits the Advance Ruling Authority to decide the issues earmarked for it under Section 97(2) and no other issue can be decided by the Advance Ruling Authority - The issue for which Advance Ruling is sought depends on the 'Provisions of e-way bill', which is not in the ambit of this authority. The Application is therefore rejected without going into the merits of the case, on the issue of lack of jurisdiction.

Summary

Issues:
1. Requirement of e-way bill for consignments with multiple invoices exceeding the specified limit.

Analysis:
1. The applicant, engaged in the business of Refining of Edible Oils, sought an Advance Ruling on the necessity of e-way bill for consignments involving multiple invoices to multiple customers moved together, where the value of each invoice is below the e-way bill generation limit but the aggregate value exceeds the limit.

2. The applicant owns transport vehicles for delivering goods to customers in Tamil Nadu without generating e-way bills for intra-state supplies up to ?1,00,000. They argued that as per Rule 138(7) of CGST Rules, 2017, the transporter must generate an e-way bill if the aggregate consignment value exceeds ?1,00,000, but this rule has not been notified. They interpreted the e-way bill requirement on an invoice basis, stating that no e-way bill is needed if each invoice value is below ?1,00,000.

3. During the hearing, the applicant sought clarification on whether e-way bills are required for multiple consignments in a conveyance, each below ?1,00,000. The Authority clarified that e-way bill provisions are not covered under Advance Ruling and advised the applicant to seek clarification from the GST office.

4. The specific issue for Advance Ruling was whether e-way bills are necessary for consignments with multiple invoices exceeding the e-way bill limit. However, the Authority noted that the scope of Advance Ruling is limited to issues specified in Section 97(2) of the CGST Act/TNGST Act, which does not include e-way bill provisions. Therefore, the application was rejected due to lack of jurisdiction.

5. The ruling stated that the application by M/s. Tamil Nadu Edible Oils Private Limited was rejected under Section 98(2) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017, as the question raised did not fall within the scope of issues that the Advance Ruling Authority can decide under Section 97(2 of the Acts.