9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bars this authority to take up or admit an application which has been already pending or decided in any proceedings in case of the applicant under any of the provisions of the Act under proviso to section 98(2). The applicant's plea for admission of his application for advance ruling in terms of proviso of sub section (2) of section 98 of CGST Act, 2017 is rejected. - AAR No. 12 /AP/GST/2021 - - - Dated:- 22-2-2021 - SRI. D. RAMESH, AND SRI. A. SYAM SUNDAR, MEMBER Represented by : Dr. Ramaraju Srinivasa Rao, Advocate and Tax consultant ORDER (Under Sub-Section (2) of Section 98 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and sub-section (2) of Section 98 of Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) 1. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion, whole red gram was purchased on their own, converted it into dall and supplied its own dall in advance to the Corporation. Subsequently after receipt of dall, Corporation has sent whole red gram to the applicant as per its convenience and availability. The incidental charges is ₹ 4.50 per kg (as per the work order dated 04.09.2019). The applicant further opines that though the initial arrangement looks like, 'custom milling', the transaction has actually taken the shape of 'barter' subsequently, for various reasons. Applicant did neither job work nor custom milling. The applicant submits that fts own dall has been supplied in advance and it has not milled pulses belonging to the Corporation as it is evident fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the AP State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Vijayawada and receipt of whole red gram at a later date from the Corporation merits classification as transaction of 'barter'? 2. Whether the packing charges of ₹ 4.50 received by the applicant for packing 1 Kg. of red gram dall supplied to the said Corporation are taxable? On Verification of basic information of the applicant, it is observed that the applicant falls under State jurisdiction, i.e. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Ibrahimpatnam, Circle, Vijayawada-I Division. The application has been forwarded to the jurisdictional officer with a copy marked to the Central Tax authorities for their remarks as per the Sec. 98 (1) of CGST /APGST Act 2017 and the remarks are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... search dt: 05.10.2020 under rule 139 (1) of the APGST Act, issued by the Joint Commissioner (ST), Vijayawada-I Division. The Jurisdictional officer submitted that the applicant had approached the Advance Ruling authority on 23.11.2020 in contravention of the proviso to section 98 (2) of APGST Act, according to which the application is deemed to be rejected as the issue is already pending with the proper officer. 5. Virtual Hearing: The proceedings of Hearing were conducted through video conference on 05 th February, 2021, for which the authorized representative, Dr. Ramaraju Srinivasa Rac, Advocate and tax consultant attended and reiterated the submissions already made. 6. Discussion and Findings: We have examined the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
