9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 218 - AAR - GSTMaintainability of Advance Ruling application - taxability of Tamarind seeds - HELD THAT - The Applicant, vide their letter dated 16.08.2021, has informed this authority that they wish to withdraw their application. Further the applicant has to discharge fee of ₹ 5,000/- each in terms of Section 97(1) of the CGST Act 2017 as well as KGST Act 2017, whereas the applicant has discharged the fee of ₹ 5,000/- only under KGST Act 2017 and hence the instant application is liable for rejection under Section 98 (2) of CGST Act 2017. The application filed by the Applicant for advance ruling is hereby rejected.
Issues Involved:
1. Application for Advance Ruling under CGST Act, 2017 and KGST Act, 2017 regarding taxability of Tamarind seeds under GST. Analysis: The case involved an application for Advance Ruling under Section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 and KGST Act, 2017 by a trader of Tamarind seeds. The Applicant sought clarification on whether Tamarind seeds are taxable or exempt under the GST Act. However, the Applicant later expressed the intention to withdraw their application. It was noted that the Applicant had only paid the prescribed fee under the KGST Act, while the fee was required to be paid under both CGST and KGST Acts. Consequently, the Authority for Advance Rulings decided to reject the application based on the non-compliance with the fee payment requirement under the CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, the ruling issued by the Authority was the rejection of the Applicant's request for advance ruling due to the failure to fulfill the fee payment obligations as mandated by both the CGST Act, 2017 and KGST Act, 2017. The decision highlighted the importance of compliance with procedural requirements, including the payment of fees under the respective GST Acts, for the processing and consideration of applications for Advance Ruling.
|
