2019 (2) TMI 915 - AAR - GST

Past Activity Queries Ineligible for Advance Ruling under CGST/RGST Act, 2017

The Authority concluded that the applicant's queries related to past activities were ineligible for an advance ruling under the CGST/RGST Act, 2017, ... Eligibility for Advance Ruling - Admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid - Determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or both - question raised are of the past period i.e. 2017-18 - Section 95(a) of the CGST & RGST Act 2017 - Held that:- Section 95 says that only activities/matter which are either being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken are qualified for advance ruling - In the instant case as the period of activity is past-period i.e. 2017-18 hence, application is not eligible for advance ruling. Issues:Admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid; Determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or both.Analysis:The applicant sought an advance ruling under section 97(2)(d) & (e) of the CGST Act 2017 regarding converting into a regular GST dealer and availing credit of stock in hand. The applicant relied on a press release and publications stating an increase in the turnover limit for GST Composition dealers to Rs. 1.50 Crore. However, the jurisdictional officer noted discrepancies in the applicant's filing history, serving a notice for non-filing returns in the 2017-18 financial year.Personal Hearing:During the personal hearing, the authorized representative reiterated the technical/system error nature of the query, emphasizing the submissions made in the advance ruling application.Findings & Conclusion:The Authority observed that the questions pertained to the past period of 2017-18. Referring to Section 95(a) of the CGST & RGST Act 2017, which defines advance ruling as decisions on matters being undertaken or proposed, the Authority concluded that activities from a past period are not eligible for an advance ruling. Consequently, the ruling stated that the applicant's queries related to past activities were ineligible for an advance ruling under the CGST/RGST Act, 2017, resulting in no ruling being provided.