9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 935X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly according to his own determination, in which case, the ruling loses its relevance and applicability even. Any law provision has to be interpreted in a constructive and harmonious way keeping in mind the object of the purpose of the provision - On a conjoint reading of the provisions of Section 95(a), section 97 (2) and Section 103, it is opined that a supplier in the capacity of a recipient of his inward supplies only and not vice versa is only eligible to seek an advance ruling and not a mere recipient of goods or services in question even when he may otherwise be a supplier of his own goods or services. The Order of the Advance Ruling Authority in this matter is confirmed - appeal disposed off. - TN/AAAR/07/2021(AR), A.R. Appeal N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity finds that advance ruling pronounced by it under sub-section (1) of Section 101 has been obtained by the appellant by fraud or suppression of material facts or misrepresentation of facts, it may, by order, declare such ruling to be void sb-initio and thereupon all the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder shall apply to the appellant as if such advance ruling has never been made. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the Central Goods and Service Tax Act and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the Central Goods and Service Tax A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... offered to Appellant by RLDA in this unique contract awarded to them by RLDA. 3.1 The Original Authorities had ruled as follows: The application for Advance Ruling filed by the applicant is not admitted under sub section (2) of section 98 of the CGST Act 2017 and the TNGST Act 2017 as the supply based on the lease agreement between the applicant and RLDA for which the applicability of the Notification is sought is not undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. 4.1 Aggrieved by the above decision, the Appellant has filed the present appeal. The grounds of appeal are as follows: As a supplier of rendering the development of MFC services, the appellant is eligible to seek clarification for the applicability o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as required under law before this Appellate Authority on 09th February 2021. The Authorized representatives of the Appellant, Shri. R.R. Balasubramaniyan, Director, Shri. M. Jaganathan, Director of the appellant company, appeared for hearing. They reiterated the written submissions filed along with the Appeal. They submitted a compendium of statutory provisions and case laws relied upon by them. DISCUSSION FINDINGS: 6.1 We have carefully considered the various submissions made by the Appellant and the applicable statutory provisions. The appellant has sought ruling on the following question: Whether upfront lease amount paid to M/s. RLDA for the development of Multi functional complex (Operational building) at Erode Railway ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
