9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned in the Section 31 and section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017. Further in respect of refund of ITC, the circumstances under which the refund is to be claimed has been mentioned under the provision of Section 54/55 of CGST Act, 1944. Hence, the question raised before this authority is purely a procedural and not covered under any of the provisions of Section 97(2) of the CGST Act. It is observed that the question (i) and (ii) raised for admissibility of itc to service receiver by the applicant before the authority is not for the applicant but is related to service receiver who receive the services from the Applicant. As per the Section 103 of the CGST Act, 2017, the applicability of advance ruling should be binding only on applicant whereas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct 3. Brief Facts of the case 3.1The Applicant is providing Engineering /Works contract services in respect of Construction of Fuel pumps, Gas line Installation Distributions, Installation of Telecom Tower and Prepare Retail outlets for companies. 3.2 The Applicant have filed GSTR-1 GSTR-3B for FY 2018-19 and tax was also paid for all tax periods within the time limits provided in section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. But in the above GSTR-1, in some sales invoices, Wrong Tax Invoice Numbers were uploaded as compared to the invoice number printed on the original invoices issued by the firm. 3.3 The applicant stated that the Service Receiver informed in the month of October 2019 that he could not avail ITC due to differences ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... voice tax period. For example, if an original invoice dated 12.7.2018 is being amended in August then the amended invoice date cannot be later than 31.07.2018. (ii) The last date for availing input tax credit relating to invoice issued during the financial year 2018-19, is the last date of filing of Sept. 2019 GSTR-3B return i.e. 20.10.2019. (iii) Refund is admissible only on the cases as mentioned in under Section 54 of CGST Act, 2017. 6. RECORD OF PERSONAL HEARING - Shri Akash Paladiya, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the Applicant for personal hearing on electronic mode and he reiterated the submissions already made in the application and also reiterated that the questions raised before the Authority is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f. Whether applicant is required to be registered g. Whether any particular thing done by the applicant with respect to any goods or services or both amounts to or results in a supply of goods or services or both. within the meaning of that term. 7.4. The applicant has submitted that the present application is in respect of a question about admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid, thus the question is covered under the Section 97(2)(d) of the CGST Act, 2017. Before entertaining this advance ruling application, it needs to be considered whether this questions can be legally proposed before the Advance Ruling Authority in terms of the law'? 7.5. It becomes important to address this quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the question raised before this authority is purely a procedural and not covered under any of the provisions of Section 97(2) of the CGST Act. 7.8. It is observed that the question (i) and (ii) raised for admissibility of itc to service receiver by the applicant before the authority is not for the applicant but is related to service receiver who receive the services from the Applicant. As per the Section 103 of the CGST Act, 2017, the applicability of advance ruling should be binding only on applicant whereas in this case applicant wants reply for the problem raised/faced by the service receiver not applicant. 7.9 This Authority is of the view that based on the detailed reading and understanding of Section 97 of the CGST Act, an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
