9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvance ruling and concluded that the appellants being recipients of service is not entitled to maintain an application before the AAR. Under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, in Section 95(c) the term applicant has been defined to mean any person registered or desirous of obtaining registration under the Act. Thus, in our view, the said term has been defined in the most widest possible manner to include any person registered or desirous of obtaining a registration under the Act. Undoubtedly, the appellants are registered under the provisions of the Act. Section 97 of the Act deals with application for advance ruling - The application filed by the appellants would fall under clause (b), Section 97(2) as the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tate : Mr. T. M. Siddique Mr. Debashis Ghosh Mr. Varun Kothari JUDGMENT (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, ACJ.) 1. This intra-Court appeal filed by the writ petitioners is directed against the order dated 5th April, 2023 in W.P.A. 6251 of 2023. The appellants filed the writ petition challenging an order passed by the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling, Goods and Services Tax (for short, AAR ) dated 9th February, 2023, by which the application filed by the appellants for an advance ruling was rejected on the ground the appellants have no locus standi to file such an application. The learned Single Bench by the impugned order has relegated the appellants to the appellate authority under the Act to agitate the correctness of the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clause (b), Section 97(2) as the appellants seek for a ruling as regards applicability of an exemption notification no.12/2017- CGST (Rate) dated 28th June, 2017. 4. If that be the case, it will be well within the jurisdiction of the AAR to consider the application on merits rather than rejecting the same on the ground of lack of locus standi. 5. As pointed out, the appellants clearly fall within the definition of applicant as defined under Section 95(c) of the Act, therefore, we are of the view that the application filed by the appellants before the AAR has to decided on merits. 6. In the case of M/s. Gayatri Projects Limited anr. Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Durgapur Charge Ors. in M.A.T. No. 2027 of 2022 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
