2022 (12) TMI 1029

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tificate ('ICWA') and their ilk. While so, the petitioner filed application for advance ruling vide Form GST ARA - 01 (as per Rule 104(1)) of CGST Act seeking ruling inter alia on the point whether the coaching/training provided by the applicant for students for the above courses conducted by it fall within the wider meaning of the term 'education' and in relation to education and other related aspects. The Advance Ruling Authority (herein after, 'ARA') after elaborate hearing passed its ruling vide order AAR No.08/AP/GST/2020, dated 05.03.2020, wherein the ARA held that the applicant was not eligible for the exemption under Entry No.66(a) of Notification No.12/2017-CT(Rate), dated 28.06.2017, as amended. It also gave rulings on the other related issues raised by the petitioner before it. (ii) Aggrieved by the above rulings, the petitioner filed appeal before the appellate authority for advance ruling and after hearing, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal on 28.09.2020 by confirming the rulings made by the ARA. Aggrieved, the present writ petition is filed by the petitioner. 3. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Y.Sreenivasa Reddy and Sr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra, v. Arihant Enterprises 2019 (11) TMI 397. (b) Learned counsel would submit that since the ARA was already made known that the investigation is pending against the petitioner, the authority ought not to have admitted his application. However, unfortunately, the primary authority has not only admitted his application but also gave rulings in respect of the questions raised by him. Hence, aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed appeal and in the said appeal, one of the grounds raised by him is with regard to the error committed by the ARA in admitting his application in view of the already pending investigation. Learned counsel referred Para 8 of the grounds of appeal in this regard. Then, learned counsel referring to the Para 5 of the appellate order, would submit that though the contention raised by the petitioner was mentioned, the appellate authority has not given any finding on the said contention and ultimately dismissed the appeal by confirming the order of the ARA. Learned counsel would thus submit that the original order as well as the appellate order are vitiated as they are against the spirit of the proviso to Section 98....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be rejected under this sub-section unless an opportunity of hearing has been given to the applicant: Provided also that where the application is rejected, the reasons for such rejection shall be specified in the order. (3) A copy of every order made under sub-section (2) shall be sent to the applicant and to the concerned officer. (4) Where an application is admitted under sub-section (2), the Authority shall, after examining such further material as may be placed before it by the applicant or obtained by the Authority and after providing an opportunity of being heard to the applicant or his authorised representative as well as to the concerned officer or his authorised representative, pronounce its advance ruling on the question specified in the application. (5) Where the members of the Authority differ on any question on which the advance ruling is sought, they shall state the point or points on which they differ and make a reference to the Appellate Authority for hearing and decision on such question. (6) The Authority shall pronounce its advance ruling in writing within ninety days from the date of receipt of application. (7....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....idence or to produce a document or any other thing in any inquiry in the same manner, as provided in the case of a civil court under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. Such enquiry referred to in sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of section 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code. Thus, the proceedings conducted by the investigating authority under the provisions of this Act shall be construed as judicial proceedings as per the CGST/APGST Act. 8. In Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka's case (supra 1), the appellate authority for ARA, Karnataka was inter alia considering the argument of the department that the respondent/applicant therein suppressed the factum of investigation that has been initiated by the DGGSTI under the CGST Act and its filing incidental report dated 17.01.2019 and obtained the ruling from authority for advance ruling by keeping the said authority in darkness and therefore, the said ruling was invalid and void ab initio. In that context, learned appellate authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka has observed thus: "6.1. The Appellant submitted that it was brought to their notice by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... "17. The appellant has contended that the proceedings under Section 67 or Chapter XIV of the CGST Act, 2017 are not covered under the term 'proceedings' used in the first proviso to sub-section (2) of section 98 of the CGST Act, 2017. We find that this contention of the appellant is not borne out from the plain reading of the said proviso. As per the said proviso, the authority shall not admit the application where the question raised in the application is already pedning or decided in any proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the provisions of this Act. The term 'any' used in the said proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the phrase 'the provisions of this Act' leaves no room for any doubt and make it amply clear that the scope of the proviso is wide and it covers any proceedings under any of the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 with the conditions that such proceedings should be related to the question raised in the application and such proceedings should be in the case of the applicant. In the present case, the proceedings initiated by the DGGI, Surat was in the case of the appellant and it was precisely related to the question raised in the appli....