TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 1062X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T Act 2017 by the DGGI on the applicant is a judicial proceeding. The applicant has mis-declared at said Sr No 17 of subject GST ARA-01 Application form and further suppressed this material fact, despite being specifically enquired by us during the hearing on 30-6-21 wherein the authorised representatives of the applicant submitted that no investigation has been initiated by the DGGI, Surat on the applicant - the Advance Ruling cannot be used as a mechanism to nullify and frustrate the inquiry proceedings already initiated vide section 70(1) of CGST Act. The applicant should bear in mind that the CGST Act has deemed this Authority to be a civil court for the purposes of section 195, but not for the purposes of Chapter XXVI of the Code ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e letter dated 29-7-21, the Authority required DGGI, Surat to intimate, as follows: 1. Whether any proceedings under relevant Section of CGST Act was initiated. Copy of notice to be submitted. 2. Has any summons/ proceedings initiated. Copy of the same to be submitted. 3. Has any Search proceedings/ DRC-01A Part A under Rule 142 (1A) of CGST Rules, 2017/ an inquiry/ proceeding was initiated before 5-3-20. Copy of the same to be submitted. 4. The Deputy Director, DGGI Surat submitted as follows- i. a case of misclassification of goods fryums against M/s VL Traders (Trade name), Shri Vipul Laljibhai Dobariya (legal name) has been booked by DGGI on 17-2-2020. The said case was booked for supply of goods falling under HS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing was granted on 23-12-20. Shri Ishwarkumar Jivani appeared (online hearing). 5.2 Personal hearing was granted on 15-6-21. Due to request for adjournment by the applicant, another hearing was granted on 30-6-21. Shri Hemant Desai, Advocate and Shri Ishwar Jivani, CA appeared hearing and re-iterated the submissions made in the application. On specific enquiry whether any enquiry/ proceeding has been initiated in relation to the question raised in the subject application, the authorised representatives submitted that no enquiry was initiated against the applicant. Findings 6 . The issue before us is whether subject Application merits admissibility in wake of DGGI investigation initiated against the applicant vide Search Auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hereby we hold that subject inquiry initiated under Section 70(1) of the CGST Act 2017 by the DGGI on the applicant is a judicial proceeding. We further note that the investigation initiated by DGGI against the applicant is on the same issue the applicant approached us for pronouncing a Ruling on classification of subject goods. 10. The applicant was aware of the Search conducted in its premises vide a valid Search authorisation issued by competent authority under Rule 139(1) CGST Rules and Section 67(2) CGST Act and the proceedings initiated vide said Summons under the provisions of Section 70 of CGST Act. The proprietor of the applicant was aware that he had given a combined statement in pursuance to the summons issued, but the applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation is not already pending or decided in any proceedings in their case under any of the provisions of the Act and that nothing contrary to this declaration was found by the Authority, the application was, earlier, held as maintainable. We note that no Ruling has been pronounced by the Authority with regard to the subject application but for the said interim Admission order. 13. In conspectus of aforementioned findings, we hold, as follows: i. the applicant has suppressed the material facts that DGGI had initiated inquiry with respect to the same Questions raised in the subject Application and that the proceedings initiated by DGGI vide relevant sections of CGST Act was initiated prior to filing of subject Advance Ruling applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
