9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od has expired. Therefore, this Court is persuaded to opine that the opportunity of hearing contemplated is rendered a mere formality. The petitioner must therefore have appropriate liberty to file additional plea to show cause against such reasoning and the respondent must reconsider the application. The question whether even a petition filed against the Advance Ruling Authority s order under Section 98(2) or 98(4) of the CGST Act/KGST Act could be considered in its full import in an appropriate case, but for the present, this Court is of the considered view that as the interference is with the Advance Ruling Authority s order under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act/KGST Act on the ground of denial of opportunity of hearing as contemplated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be placed before a Division Bench of this Court. Ms. Veena J Kamath and Mr. Hema Kumar K are heard in the light of the petitioner's grievance and the aforesaid submissions. 3. The respondent has rejected the petitioner's application as contemplated under Section 98(2) of the CGST/KGST Act recording that the petitioner, who had the benefit of contract for construction of pumping stations and reservoirs as also for Operation and Maintenance work between 01.11.2014 and 31.10.2021, has filed application for advance ruling on 07.09.2022 after the expiry of the corresponding contractual period. The respondent, interpreting the expression 'being' as found in Section 97(2)(g) of the KGST/CGST Act, has opined that the phrase ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s follows: The Hon'ble Apex Court in Columbia Sportswear Company, supra, has observed that a writ petition may remain pending in the High Court for years, first before a learned Single Judge and thereafter in Letters Patent Appeal before the Division Bench and as a result the object of chapter XIX-B of the Act which is to enable an applicant to get an advance ruling in respect of a transaction expeditiously would be defeated. Hence, it is held that when an advance ruling of the Authority is challenged before the High Court under Article 226 and/or 227 of the constitution, the same should be heard directly by a Division Bench of the High Court and decided as expeditiously as possible. The question must be whether every challen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
