9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s original position, by way of remanding the case to the lower authority, with a direction to forward the letter dated 28.07.2022 of DGGI along with its enclosures to the appellant enabling them to comment on the same, and to offer them another opportunity of personal hearing before deciding the case as per the provisions of law. Conclusion - The principles of natural justice have not been followed in the instant case, since the advance ruling authority had erred in not sharing the documents and comments forwarded by DGGI, with the appellants. The matter is remanded to the Lower Authority for consideration and passing of appropriate orders, after following the principles of natural justice. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lnadu State Authority for Advance ruling on the Application for Advance ruling filed by the Appellant. 2.1 The Appellant has stated that the Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council (TNNMC) was formed as per provisions of the Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Act, 1926. The purpose for which the Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Act 1926 was enacted was to provide for the Registration of Nurses, Midwives, Health Visitors, Auxiliary Nurse-Midwives and Dhais in the State of Madras. The Act was enacted with the aim of advancement of Nursing Education and champion the cause of the nursing profession. 2.2. The Appellant had approached Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR), Tamil Nadu, vide GST-ARA-01 dated 28.06.2022 for clarification of GST applicability on various fees collected by it and to provide ruling for their taxability under GST act, SAC Code and Prevailing GST rates, with the following question: "Whether GST is applicable on various fees collected by Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council, a Government Authority?" 2.3. At the time of filing the application, an investigation by the Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI, Chennai Zonal unit, Chennai was in progress. A statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e applicant, an Incident Report No.89/2022 dated 24.06.2022 having OR No. 89/2022 dated 16.06.2022 determining tax amount of Rs. 474 lakhs. Further, the said incident report was issued after the statement deposed by Registrar of the applicant on 18.04.2022 and 14.06.2022. Therefore, it is apparent that proceedings are pending against the applicant on the date of filing of advance ruling online application on 27.06.2022 and liable to be rejected under first proviso to Section 98(2) of the Act." 3. Aggrieved over the decision of AAR in the Order No. 17/ARA/2023 dated 19.06.2023, M/S TAMIL NADU NURSES AND MIDWIVES COUNCIL preferred the subject appeal. In the grounds of appeal, they stated, inter alia, as follows: * AAR Tamil Nadu erred in concluding that summon u/s 70 is a proceeding. * Incident report issued by DGGI-South, Sub-National unit, Chennai, as stated in AAR order (para 5), unless it is converted into Show Cause Notice shall not be construed as proceedings. * AAR has erred in NOT considering the distinction between proceeding and investigation pronounced by various courts and AAR cited by us. * AAR has erred in citing a ruling (Para 8.7) passed by AAAR AP i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the passing of an adjudication order; Without issuing a show cause notice proceeding cannot be deemed to be started and once an adjudication order is passed, the proceeding is deemed to be concluded; • In G.K. Trading Company v. Union of India, the Allahabad High Court held that the term "proceeding" and "inquiry" are two different terms and they cannot be intermixed and thus, the "inquiry" launched under section 70 of the CGST Act against the petitioner simultaneously with the "proceedings" launched under UP GST law is not barred by the limitations of section 6(2)(b); The section 70 also spells out only powers vested with the investigating officer as prescribed by Sec 193 and 228 of IPC in relation to summons/statement on oath and the term "Judicial Proceedings" used in this section pertains only to powers vested by IP; • In Para 12 of its order dated 17/08/2022 in Writ Petition No.26145 of 2022, Telengana High Court in the case of M/s. Srico Projects Pvt. Ltd., has ruled that though the word "proceedings" has neither been defined in Chapter XVII nor in the definition clause i.e., in Section 2 of the CGST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he instant case revolves exclusively around the admissibility of the application for advance ruling filed by the appellant. It is seen that the Ruling as pronounced by the Original Advance Ruling Authority vide Advance Ruling No. 17/ARA/2023 dated 19.06.2023 reads as "The advance ruling application is rejected for the reasons discussed in para 8 supra". 6.2 We also notice from the said ruling that the proceedings initiated by the DGGI, Chennai Zonal Unit prior to the filing of application by the appellant, and its impact on the admissibility or otherwise of the application had formed the crux of the discussion. This discussion has led to the decision arrived at by the Advance Ruling Authority to reject the application, per se. Further, we notice from the grounds of appeal filed before us by the appellant, that the same revolves exclusively around the term 'proceedings' and whether the inquiry or investigation initiated by DGGI, would fall within the ambit of the word 'proceedings' impacting the admissibility of the original application for advance ruling filed by the appellant. 6.3 Apart from the Appeal filed in Form GST ARA-02 dated 12.09.2023, befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same issue. This being the case, the advance ruling authority ought to have shared the new findings of DGGI that was lying before them, and discussed the same in detail, either during the personal hearing, or thereafter, before proceeding to finalise the case. 6.7 Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the principles of natural justice have not been followed in the instant case, since the advance ruling authority had erred in not sharing the documents and comments forwarded by DGGI, with the appellants. Accordingly, we are of the view that justice will be met by restoring the application for advance ruling to its original position, by way of remanding the case to the lower authority, with a direction to forward the letter dated 28.07.2022 of DGGI along with its enclosures to the appellant enabling them to comment on the same, and to offer them another opportunity of personal hearing before deciding the case as per the provisions of law. We further find that this authority is empowered vide Section 101(1) of the CGST/TNGST Acts, 2017 to pass such orders as deemed fit. 7. In view of the above, we order as under ORDER The Advance Ruling No.17/ARA/2023 dated 19.06.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
