9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 946 - AAR - GSTScope of Advance Ruling application - Levy of GST - reverse charge mechanism - royalty payments - HELD THAT - As per sub section (2) of the Section 98 of the Central Goods And services Tax Act, 2017, it is clearly specified that the Authority shall not admit the application where the question raised in the application is already pending or decided in any proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the provisions of this Act. It is clear that the applicant has approached the authority, for the identical and similar issue of payment of GST under RCM on the royalty payment and hence it is observed that the applicant has approached this authority, on the issue which has already been raised in applicant s own, case under the provisions of the central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and hence we hold that in terms of section 98 (2) of the central Goods And Services Tax Act, 2017, the present application is not admitted and rejected without going into the merits of the case. Application rejected.
Issues involved: Application for advance ruling u/s 97 of CGST and SGST Acts regarding liability to pay GST RCM tax on royalty payments.
Summary: The applicant, a power generating company engaged in a construction project, sought an advance ruling on the liability to pay GST RCM tax on royalty payments. The applicant declared no pending or decided proceedings under the Act. However, it was revealed that the applicant had received notices for the same issue under Section 73 of the Acts. The Authority found the application inadmissible as the question raised was already pending or decided in the applicant's case. The application was rejected without delving into the merits of the case, in accordance with Section 98(2) of the CGST Act. The Authority noted discrepancies in the applicant's submission and found that the applicant had approached the Authority on an issue already raised in their own case under the Acts. Despite the applicant's attempt to portray the issue as new, it was established that the same matter had been subject to notices under Section 73. Consequently, the application was deemed inadmissible and rejected without further consideration. The Authority emphasized the importance of accurate disclosure in the application process and highlighted that the applicant's attempt to present the issue as new was misleading. The applicant's acknowledgment of receiving notices on the same issue further strengthened the Authority's decision to reject the application without assessing the case's merits. In conclusion, the application for advance ruling regarding the liability to pay GST RCM tax on royalty payments was found inadmissible due to the issue being already raised in the applicant's case under the CGST and SGST Acts. The Authority rejected the application without further examination based on the provisions of Section 98(2) of the CGST Act.
|
