2018 (5) TMI 1280 - HC - GST

Constitution of authority for advance ruling - It is the case of the petitioner that the portal of the taxing authority does not presently provide for a method of filing applications before the authority for advance ruling - Held that - It is pointed out that the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise and Customs, Thiruvananthapuram as also the Joint Commissioner (General) State Tax, Thiruvananthapuram have been constituted as the members of the forum, which is the authority for advance ruling in the State - it is clarified that till such time as the electronic filing system is put in place on the portal, the assessees would be permitted to file their application manually before the said authority - petition closed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Constitution of authority for advance ruling under Section 96 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Ordinance, 2017.
2. Lack of provision for filing applications before the authority for advance ruling.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a direction for the respondents to notify an authority for advance ruling as required by Section 96 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Ordinance, 2017. The petitioner was concerned that despite statutory provisions, the authority had not been constituted, hindering their ability to seek advance rulings. The respondents, represented by the Government Pleader, informed the court that the authority had indeed been established through S.R.O.No.638 of 2017 dated 21.10.2017. The forum included the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise and Customs, Thiruvananthapuram, and the Joint Commissioner (General) State Tax, Thiruvananthapuram as its members. The court noted this information and confirmed that the authority for advance ruling was now functional in the State.

2. The petitioner also raised concerns about the absence of a method for filing applications before the authority due to the lack of an electronic filing system on the taxing authority's portal. In response, the Government Pleader clarified that until the electronic filing system was operational on the portal, assessees would be allowed to submit their applications manually to the authority for advance ruling. The court acknowledged this clarification and accepted the submission made by the Government Pleader, thereby addressing the petitioner's apprehensions. Consequently, the writ petition was closed based on the assurances provided regarding the constitution of the authority and the interim filing procedures allowed for applicants.