9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed definite article and a/an is called the indefinite article. The use of the article 'an' before the noun applicant is meant to denote non-specific. In other words, the term an applicant' has to mean any applicant and not a particular applicant. Thus. The interpretation of 'an applicant' made by the AAR in their Ruling cannot be faulted. In fact, in spite of being pointed out by the appellant about the show cause notice mentioning only two issues in common with the writ, it appears that the applicant was summarily rejected without in depth scrutiny. The Ruling is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh consideration. - UKGSTARA 02/03/14-08-2020/2020-21 - - - Dated:- 11-11-2020 - SHRI P.K. GOEL AND AND ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contract service received for construction of Hotel building is available; (c) Whether input credit on goods services received for construction of banquet hall, which is rented further for customers is available; (d) Whether input credit on work contract service received for construction of banquet hall, which is rented further for customers is available; (e) Whether the expression plant machinery' would include 'hotel/banquet' under Section 17 and accordingly, input credit on work contract service or any goods service received for construction of such hotel/banquet hall is available; (f) Whether specified goods viz Lifts, sanitary items, underground cables etc. fall under expression plant machinery' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hority look the view that before deciding the application, the fact of the aforesaid writ petition, whether admitted or otherwise needs to be considered. Accordingly, a SCN dated 17.03.2020 was issued to the applicant requiring them to show cause to the Authority for Advance Ruling as to why the said application filed by them should not be rejected as per proviso to Section 98(2) of the Act. 4. Personal hearing in the matter was held on 15.06.2020 via video conferencing, wherein the applicant's counsel reiterated his earlier submissions filed vide letter dated 26.05.2020 and further submitted that appeal in the matter of CCE Vs Safari Retreats (P) ltd. others has been admitted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the judgme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... follows- a. The impugned ruling dated 08.07.2020 of the Authority for Advance Ruling of the State of Uttarakhand is a non-speaking order and violates the principles of natural justice. The Authority for Advance Ruling has passed impugned ruling without any discussion regarding applicability of submission made by the appellant and without appreciation of facts and law including the judicial precedents quoted/relied upon by the appellant. b. Appellant contended that the only ground on which the application can be rejected is when proceedings are pending or decided, as the case may be, in case of the Applicant, which means Appellant and no other person. That, in the impugned order, the Authority for Advance Ruling gravely erred in in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 through video conference. Sri Aishwarya Sharma. Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant and Smt. Preeti Manral. DC. SGST represented the SCST department. Sri Sharma strongly reiterated his contentions made out in the appeal memorandum, He further contested that the referred writ application of M s Rosewood Hospitality (P) Ltd. was not presented before the AAR and therefore rejection of their application was arbitrary. Discussion Findings We have gone through the appeal memorandum, records of personal hearing, Ruling of AAR and all other relevant records and citations. At the very outset, we are unable to accept the appellant's contentions about the interpretation of the term an applicant used in Section 98(2) of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
