Advance ruling jurisdiction is limited to supplies undertaken or proposed by the applicant; questions on services received were rejected.

An advance ruling application is maintainable only for questions falling within Section 97(2) of the CGST Act and relating to a supply being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. Where the questions concern services received by the applicant, rather than any supply made or proposed by it, the matter falls outside the advance ruling mechanism and beyond the authority's jurisdiction. On that basis, the application was held not maintainable and rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether an advance ruling application is maintainable when the questions raised relate to services received by the applicant and not to a supply of goods or services undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant.

Analysis: The statutory scheme of advance ruling permits an applicant to seek a ruling only on questions specified under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 in relation to a supply being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by that applicant. Since the questions raised concerned the services received by the applicant, the application fell outside the scope of the advance ruling provision and beyond the authority's jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The application was not maintainable and was rejected.

---