2021 (8) TMI 581 - AAR - GST

AAR rejects application for advance ruling due to pending issue with proper officer

In Re: The President, Vijayawada Wholesale Commercial Complex Members Welfare Society,

The AAR rejected the applicant's plea for admission of the application, stating that the issue was already pending with the proper officer. Therefore, the ... Maintainability of Advance Ruling application - issue already pending with proper officer - Supply of goods and/or services - Requirement of registration or not - HELD THAT:- It is evident from the application that the applicant approached the Authority for Advance Ruling on an issue which has already been pending with the proper officer. It bars this authority to take up or admit an application which has been already pending or decided in any proceedings in case of the applicant under any of the provisions of the Act under proviso to section 98 (2) - the applicant's plea for admission of his application for advance ruling in terms of provisions of sub section (2) of section 98 of CGST Act, 2017 is rejected. Issues:1. Whether the activities of the applicant can be considered as the supply of goods and/or services under the APSGST/CGST ActsRs.2. Whether the applicant is required to obtain registration under the said ActsRs.Analysis:1. The applicant, an unregistered dealer, is a part of an association formed for various purposes such as land purchase, division, construction supervision, and provision of amenities to its members. The society collected funds from its members and provided common facilities like roads, electricity, sanitation, and water. The society also rented out shops owned by defaulting members, earning revenue. The assessing officer directed the society to register under Section 22(1) of the Act, considering their activities as commercial. The officer confirmed that the society collected over Rs. 1.2 crores from members in FY 2017-18, surpassing the threshold limit for registration.2. The applicant sought clarification from the AAR regarding the nature of their activities and the necessity of registration under the CGST and APSGST Acts. During the virtual hearing, the authorized representatives of the applicant presented their case. However, the AAR rejected the application for advance ruling as the issue was already pending with the proper officer. The AAR cited the proviso to section 98(2), which prohibits admitting applications already under consideration or decided in any proceedings related to the applicant under the Act.In conclusion, the AAR rejected the applicant's plea for admission of the application, stating that the issue was already pending with the proper officer. Therefore, the application for advance ruling was not admitted based on the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 98 of the CGST Act, 2017.