TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1088
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his Advance ruling pronounced by the Appellate Authority under Chapter XVII of the Act shall be binding only (a) on the appellant who had sought it in respect of any matter referred to in sub-section (2) of Section 97 for advance ruling; (b) on the concerned officer or the jurisdictional officer in respect of the appellant. 3. Under Section 103 (2) of the Act, this advance ruling shall be binding unless the law, facts or circumstances supporting the said advance ruling have changed. 4. Under Section 104 (1) of the Act, where the Appellate Authority finds that advance ruling pronounced by it under sub-section (1) of Section 101 has been obtained by the appellant by fraud or suppression of material facts or misrepresentation of facts, it may, by order, declare such ruling to be void ab-initio and thereupon all the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder shall apply to the appellant as if such advance ruling has never been made. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the Central Goods and Service Tax Act and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act are in pari materia and have the same provisions in like matter ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nnai Zonal Unit was in progress, and a Statement dated 18.04.2022 recorded from Dr. S. Ani Grace Kalaimathi, Registrar of Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council, wherein the details of charges/fees collected by Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council for the period from 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2022 has been furnished by the appellant. It is seen that another Statement dated 14.06.2022 was also recorded from Dr. S. Ani Grace Kalaimathi, wherein the issue relating to taxability on the consideration in the form of fees collected has been pointed out and discussed in detail. Moreover, in clause 17 of the application filed by them, they had declared that no proceedings are pending or decided in any proceedings in the appellant's case under any of the provisions of the Act. The AAR, originally vide its order 17/ARA/2023 dated 19.06.2023 rejected the application filed by the appellant under first proviso to Section 98 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017, on the ground that summons issued u/s 70 is a proceeding under the CGST Act. 2.5. Aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal on 13.09.2023 vide Appeal No.02/2023 before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Tamilnadu (AAAR), against the decis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt have only made a passing remark without going into question of the definition of "Proceeding" under GST Act, whereas they had made submissions citing ruling distinguishing "Proceeding" and "Investigations". • The Appellate Authority vide Advance Ruling (Appeal) No. GUJ/GAAAR/APPEAL/2022/22, in the case of M/s. Shalby Limited, had ruled that: a. Section 98 (2) will be attracted only when a show cause notice has been issued or order is passed which is not there in the present case and the investigation initiated by state tax is not within the ambit of the term proceedings. To this extent, appellant relied upon judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT-I Vs Authority of Advance Ruling 120201 I 19 Taxmann. Com 80 (Delhi HC) and the case of Sage Publication Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) reported at [2016] 387 ITR 437 (Delhi), which was later affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in (20171246 Taxman 57 (SC). b. The term Proceedings' only includes any proceedings that may result in a decision i.e. show cause notice or order and cannot include mere inquiry or investigation initiated by investigation agencies ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....being applied, namely, any proceedings pending or decided in the case of an appellant under the provisions of the CGST Act, it would mean proceedings where the question raised in the application for advance ruling has already been decided or is pending decision. Therefore, inquiry or investigation would not come within the ambit of the word "proceedings". • Crave leave for submission of additional grounds at the time of personal hearing. Hence, the Appellant prayed that the Appellate Authority may pass orders to set aside impugned order under Appeal and pass such other orders, as deemed fit. PERSONAL HEARING: 4. The Authorized Representative (AR), Shri V Swaminathan, Partner of M/s. P.S. Subramania Iyer & Co., Chartered Accountants, appeared for the personal hearing on 27.12.2024, on behalf of the appellant. He reiterated the submissions made in the 'grounds of Appeal' enclosed along with the appeal application. He stated that there is no clear definition in the GST provisions for the term 'proceedings' and hence referred to various judicial decisions. Further the AR argued that the issuance of summons shall not be treated as 'proceedings' as stated in prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is rejected, the reasons for such rejection shall be specified in the order." 5.2 Since the first proviso to Section 98 (2) restricts admitting application seeking advance ruling on questions which are already pending in any proceedings in the case of an appellant under any of the provisions of the Act, the term 'proceedings' assumes immense significance in the context of the instant case. It is quite clear that the term 'proceedings' has not been defined under the CGST Act, 2017. However, the word 'proceedings' is seen to have been widely used in the Act, ibid, either as it is, in the context of the situation, or with a prefix bringing out the meaning and purpose in an unambiguous manner like 'Recovery proceedings', 'Assessment proceedings', etc. To highlight a few, the table affixed below, brings out the picture as to when and where the term 'proceedings' has been referred to in the CGST Act, 2017, and in what context the same has been used, i.e., Section Referred as Context/ Phrase 6 (2) (b) Any proceedings Cross jurisdiction - "has initiated any proceedings on a subject matter" Proviso to 29 (1) and 29 (2) The proceedings Cancellation or Suspe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al audit conducted under sub-section (1) results in detection of tax not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded, or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised, the proper officer may initiate action under section 73 or section 74.". 5.4 Apart from the above, it may be seen that while the term 'any proceedings' contained in the phrase in proviso to Section 98 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017, viz., "in any proceedings in the case of the applicant under any of the provisions of this Act", by itself conveys an exhaustive picture, the additional usage of the words 'under any of the provisions of the Act', makes it all the more broader and all encompassing. We are therefore of the opinion that the usage of the words 'any proceeding' in the proviso to Section 98 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017, will encompass within its fold all the proceedings involving scrutiny, inquiry, investigation, cancellation or suspension of registration, audit, inspection, search and seizure, assessment, adjudication, recovery, etc., as well. 5.5.1 The introduction of GST is considered a paradigm shift in the history of tax reform and the statute relating to it has been framed afresh keeping in mind the new conc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... distinguishable from the case involving Radha Krishan Industries, and thereby it does not come to their aid. 5.5.3 The appellant has relied on the Judgement dated 02.12.2020 of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of M/s. G.K. Trading Company in Writ Tax No. 666 of 2020, wherein it was held that the word "inquiry" in Section 70 is not synonymous with the word "proceedings" in Section 6 (2) (b) of the U.P.G.S.T. Act /C.G.S.T. Act. It was further held therein as follows :- "The words "any proceeding" on the same "subject-matter" used in Section 6 (2) (b) of the Act, which is subject to conditions specified in the notification issued under sub-Section (1); means any proceeding on the same cause of action and for the same dispute involving some adjudication proceedings which may include assessment proceedings, proceedings for penalties etc., proceedings for demands and recovery under Section 73 and 74 etc". Here again, it may be noted that the Hon'ble High Court has attempted to provide clarity to the term 'proceedings' as used in Section 6 (2) (b) of the CGST Act, 2017, only and not in relation to any other provisions of the Act. 5.6.1 Now we observe that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ARA shall not admit the application as per the first proviso to Section 98 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017. In this regard, paras 7, 11, 12 and 13 of the said judgment involving M/s. Master Minds are reproduced below, for reference. "7. As can be seen, the main thrust of argument of learned counsel for petitioner is that in view of the commencement of the investigation by the DGGSTI even before the submission of application by the petitioner, the ARA ought not to have admitted his application. In this regard, it is apposite to refer to section 98 of the CGST/AP GST Act, which reads thus: "98. Procedure on receipt of application:- (1) On receipt of an application, the Authority shall cause a copy thereof to be forwarded to the concerned officer and, if necessary, call upon him to furnish the relevant records: Provided that where any records have been called for by the Authority in any case, such records shall, as soon as possible, be returned to the said concerned officer. (2) The Authority may, after examining the application and the records called for and after hearing the applicant or his authorised representative and the concerned officer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dmit the application where the question raised in the application is already pending or decided in any proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the provisions in the said Act. Thus, it is needless to emphasize that the first proviso puts an embargo on the authority of the ARA to admit an application. The said embargo says that where the questions raised in the application are already pending or decided by any proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the provisions of the CGST/APGST Act, the authority shall not admit the application. The submission of the petitioner herein is that the phrase 'any proceedings' encompasses the investigation of an application under the provisions of the Act. To buttress his argument, the petitioner referred to Section 70 of the APGST Act, which reads thus: "70. Power to summon persons to give evidence and produce documents.-(1) The proper officer under this Act shall have power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary either to give evidence 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the application in the instant case and issued its ruling." Under these circumstances, considering the provisions of the statute discussed earlier in this order, we are inclined to go with the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of M/s. Master Minds. 5.7 At this juncture, it becomes imperative to analyse as to whether the query raised in the application for advance ruling is the same on which the investigation was initiated, and whether the investigation proceedings precedes the application for advance ruling. Accordingly, it is seen that while the application for advance ruling in the instant case was received on 28.06.2022, the first summon issued by the Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI, Chennai Zonal Unit is dated 12.04.2022 based on which a statement has been recorded from Dr. S. Ani Grace Kalaimathi, Registrar of Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council on 18.04.2022, wherein the details of charges/fees collected by Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council for the period from 01.07.2017 to 31.03.2022, through their letter in Ref. No.1538/NC/2022 dated 18.04.2022 is seen to have been communicated. Through another statement dated 14.06.2022, the....