9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 792 - AAR - GSTMaintainability of application - scope of Advance Ruling Authority - reimbursement of Electricity Charges - HELD THAT - In the instant case the questions, on which the applicant seeks advance ruling, are not in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the said applicant, but in relation to the service/s being received by them. Therefore the instant application is beyond the jurisdiction of this authority and hence is liable for rejection. The application filed by the Applicant for advance ruling is rejected, in terms of Section 98(2) of the CGST Act 2017.
Issues:
Jurisdiction of the Advance Ruling Authority over questions related to services received by the applicant. Analysis: The case involved M/s. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd. seeking an advance ruling under Section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 & KGST Act, 2017 regarding the GST applicability on various charges related to their leased premises for running a restaurant. The applicant questioned the GST imposition on electricity charges raised by lessors and sought clarification on the legal authority for such charges. However, the Authority noted that Section 95(a) of the CGST Act 2017 limits advance rulings to questions related to the supply of goods or services undertaken by the applicant, not services received. Consequently, the Authority found the application to be beyond its jurisdiction and rejected it under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act 2017. This judgment highlights the importance of the scope of questions that can be addressed through advance rulings by the Authority. While the applicant's concerns regarding GST on electricity charges were valid, the Authority's decision was based on the specific legal framework governing advance rulings. It underscores the need for applicants to ensure that their queries fall within the purview of the Authority's jurisdiction to avoid rejection on procedural grounds. The ruling serves as a reminder for businesses to carefully assess the statutory provisions before seeking advance rulings to receive accurate and relevant guidance on GST implications. In conclusion, the Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka, dismissed the application filed by M/s. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd. as it pertained to questions beyond the scope of the Authority's jurisdiction under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act 2017. The judgment emphasizes the need for applicants to align their queries with the statutory provisions governing advance rulings to obtain valid and actionable decisions from the Authority.
|
