9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 578 - AAR - GSTMaintainability of application - application has not been filed in the prescribed format required as per the provisions of Section 97(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 104 of the CGST Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT - On a combined reading of the provisions of the Section 97 and Rule 104 of both the aforementioned Acts and Rules, we find that the application for obtaining an Advance Ruling under sub-section(1) of Section 97 is to be submitted in FORM-GST ARA-01 and shall be accompanied by a fee of Ten thousand rupees (Five thousand rupees as per Rule 104 of the CGST Rules, 2017 Five thousand rupees as per Rule 104 of the GGST Rules, 2017). The applicant has neither filed the application in the prescribed format of GST-ARA-01 nor paid the required fees of ₹ 10,000/- as required as per the provisions of aforementioned Sections and Rules. Therefore, the instant application is liable for rejection under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 for not filing the application in proper FORM GST-ARA-01 and not paying the total fees of ₹ 10,000/- i.e ₹ 5,000/- under each head CGST GGST as required under the provisions of CGST Act and Rules and respective GGST Act Rules. Instant application filed by M/s. Wiptech Peripheral pvt.ltd., 101, Dwarkadish, Virani Chowk, Tagore Road, Rajkot-360002 is hereby rejected under Section 98(2) of the CGST/GGST Act, 2017 being non-maintainable.
Issues: Application for advance ruling not filed in prescribed format and fee not paid as per provisions of CGST Act and Rules.
Analysis: 1. Non-compliance with prescribed format and fee payment: The applicant, a supplier of Earthing Electrode, sought an advance ruling regarding the GST rate applicable to their product under the Solar Rooftop Policy. However, the advance ruling application was not filed in the prescribed format of FORM-GST ARA-01 and was accompanied by an insufficient fee of only ?5,000, instead of the required ?10,000 as per the provisions of Section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 104 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The Authority highlighted the specific requirements for the application format and fee payment, emphasizing the need for adherence to the statutory provisions. 2. Statutory provisions for advance ruling application: The Authority referenced Section 97(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 104 of the CGST Rules, 2017, which mandate the submission of an advance ruling application in FORM-GST ARA-01 accompanied by a fee of ?10,000. The ruling clarified that the application should comply with the prescribed format and fee structure outlined in both the CGST Act and the GGST Act, as the provisions are similar unless explicitly stated otherwise. The failure of the applicant to meet these requirements rendered the application invalid under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. 3. Rejection of the application: Due to the non-compliance with the prescribed format and fee payment, the Authority concluded that the applicant's application for advance ruling was non-maintainable and liable for rejection under Section 98(2) of the CGST/GGST Act, 2017. The ruling emphasized that the applicant's failure to fulfill the statutory requirements regarding the application filing and fee payment precluded any detailed consideration of the substantive issue raised in the application, leading to the rejection of the application. 4. Final Ruling: In light of the non-compliance with the prescribed format and fee payment requirements, the Authority ruled to reject the instant application filed by the applicant under Section 98(2) of the CGST/GGST Act, 2017. The ruling highlighted the importance of adhering to the statutory provisions governing the submission of advance ruling applications to ensure the validity and maintainability of such applications before the Advance Ruling Authority.
|
