2022 (6) TMI 249 - AAR - GST

Maintainability of application when inquiry proceedings are pending - Government Entity as per Notification No.11/2017 31/2017 or not - works contract executing civil works for Central Government Employees Welfare Housing Organization (CGEWHO) - applicability of tax rate of 12% is applicable to the contract entered into by the applicant with CGEWHO in pursuance of N/N.11/2017 Central tax rate F.No.354/117/2017 TRU dated 28th June 2017 and amended N/N. 24/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 21st September 2017 read with N/N. 31/2017 Central Tax (Rate)) dated 13th October 2017 - HELD THAT - It is well settled law of interpretation that where the legislature uses the same expression in the same statute at two or more places then the same interpretation should be given to that expression. Thus generally the same words are used with the same meaning throughout the same statute; otherwise it would cause injustice. This principle of interpretation was upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in a catena of case law starting from AGHUBANS NARAIN SINGH VERSUS U.P. GOVT. THROUGH COLLECTOR OF BIJNOR 1966 (9) TMI 145 - SUPREME COURT and the latest being S SHER SINGH VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA 2015 (1) TMI 1467 - SUPREME COURT . Therefore in view of the amendment to Section 83(1) the expression proceedings will have the same meaning for Chapter XIV as the other chapters mentioned in the CGST Act 2017. In the present case as the DGGI Hyderabad has even issued a notice for payment of tax before the above hearing was held for disposal of the question raised before AAR. Merely because the application before the AAR was filed earlier to the investigation initiated by DGGI they will not be immune from any inquiry. Thus as the proceedings are pending under Chapter-XIV of the CGST Act 2017 regarding the question raised by the applicant their application stands rejected.

Summary

Issues:
1. Admission of application under Section 97 of GST Act for advance ruling.
2. Interpretation of the term "Government Entity" and tax rate applicability.
3. Impact of pending proceedings on the admissibility of the application.

Analysis:
1. The application filed by M/s. Srico Projects Private Limited under Section 97 of the GST Act for advance ruling was admitted by the Authority for Advance Ruling, Telangana. The applicant paid the requisite fee and declared that the questions raised were not decided by any other authority under the GST Act, leading to the admission of the application.

2. The primary questions raised by the applicant were related to the classification of CGEWHO as a "Government Entity" and the applicable tax rate for contracts with them. The applicant sought clarification on whether the tax rate of 12% (CGST@6% + SGST@6%) was applicable to contracts with CGEWHO in accordance with specific notifications.

3. During the personal hearing, the authorized representatives of the applicant highlighted the need for clarification predating a specific notification and mentioned a notice received from the DGGI regarding tax rates. However, the Authority noted that the DGGI had initiated an inquiry and issued a notice to the applicant, falling under the first proviso of Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, which could lead to the rejection of the application.

4. The Authority emphasized that if the question raised in the application is pending or decided in any proceedings concerning the applicant, the application may be refused admission. Referring to the recent amendment expanding the meaning of "proceedings" under Chapter-XIV of the CGST Act, the Authority highlighted the consistent interpretation principle in legal jurisprudence.

5. In light of the ongoing proceedings initiated by the DGGI, Hyderabad, and the notice issued to the applicant before the AAR hearing, the application was rejected due to the pendency of proceedings under Chapter-XIV of the CGST Act regarding the same question raised by the applicant. The timing of the application filing vis-a-vis the investigation did not grant immunity from inquiry, leading to the rejection of the application by the Authority for Advance Ruling, Telangana.