Advance ruling jurisdiction applies only to ongoing or proposed supplies, not completed transactions.

Advance ruling jurisdiction is confined to questions relating to a supply of goods or services that is being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. A completed transaction does not satisfy that statutory requirement, because the mechanism is meant to address ongoing or prospective supplies. As the application was filed after completion of the operation and maintenance work, the subject matter was not a live or proposed supply and fell outside the Authority's jurisdiction. The application was therefore not maintainable and was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application for advance ruling is maintainable in relation to a completed supply, or only in relation to a supply being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken.

Analysis: The advance ruling mechanism is confined to questions concerning a supply of goods or services that is being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. The expression used in the statutory scheme contemplates an ongoing or prospective transaction, not a transaction already completed. Since the application was filed after completion of the operation and maintenance work, the question raised did not relate to a live or proposed supply and therefore fell outside the jurisdiction of the Authority.

Conclusion: The application was not maintainable and was liable to be rejected.

---