Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + AAR GST - 2021 (1) TMI AAR This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (1) TMI 588 - AAR - GSTScope of Advance Ruling application - Classification of services - composite supply or mixed supply? - services for a “Single consolidated Rate” as a package - services are not naturally bundled and are capable of being provided independently - Section 2(74) of the CGST Act, 2017 - rate of GST - Applicable HSN Code - Input tax credit - refund of GST paid on outward supply invoices - HELD THAT:- The provisions for seeking Advance Ruling made under the Act is limited to the activities conducted by the applicant only and is for the purpose of clarifying issues such as classification of the supply of goods/services provided by them, their GST liability if any, applicability of a notification issued under the provisions of the Act, determination of time and value of supply of goods or services or both, admissibility of input tax credit, determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or both, whether applicant is required to be registered or 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. The very purpose of the Board for making the provision of Advance Ruling in the CGST Act, 2017 is to help the applicant in planning his activities which are liable for payment of GST. It also brings certainty in determining the tax liability, as the ruling given by the Authority for Advance Ruling is binding on the applicant as well as Government authorities. Further, it helps in avoiding long drawn and expensive litigation at a later date. Seeking an advance ruling is inexpensive and the procedure is simple and expeditious. It thus provides certainty and transparency to a taxpayer with respect to an issue which may potentially cause a dispute with the tax administration. In the present case, the applicant has asked hypothetical questions seeking Advance Ruling on an issue which has not materialised till date. We find that a period of nearly one year has lapsed after the filing of the application of Advance Ruling by the applicant (which was filed on 13.10.2019) but the agreement which they were supposed to make with the so-called Rice exporter has not materialised so far i.e. no agreement has been signed in this regard and therefore no copy has been submitted in the instant case. Without any agreement or any other relevant documents having been provided by the applicant in the instant case, it would not be possible to give a decision in the said matter.
|