2019 (2) TMI 915 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN – TMI – Eligibility for Advance Ruling – Admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid – Determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or both – question raised are of the past period i.e. 2017-18 – Section 95(a) of the CGST & RGST Act 2017 – Held that:- Section 95 says that only activities/matter which are either being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken are qualified for advance ruling – In the instant case as the period of activity is past-period i.e. 2017-18 hence, application is not eligible for advance ruling. – ARN No. RAJ/AAR/2018-19/33 Dated:- 31-1-2019 – SHRI J.P. MEENA AND SHRI HEMANT JAIN MEMBER Present for the applicant: Shri Dilip Gupta, C.A. (authorised representative) Note: Under Section 100 of the CGST/RGST Act 2017, an appeal against this ruling lies before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under section 99 of CGST/RGST Act 2017, withi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s increased to ₹ 1.50 Crore. There were many publications in news paper and social media saying that the said limit of turnover for GST Composition dealer is increased to ₹ 1.50 Crore. Statistic of sales made by the applicant as per his submission is as given below: Particulars Period Date Amount Sales made upto 01.04.2017 to 13.11.2017 84,88,256/- Sales made upto 01.04.2017 to 24.112017 87,17,826/- Sales made upto 01.04.2017 to 25.11.2017 1,09,92,785/- Total Sales for the year 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018 1,39,45,318/- The Applicant submitted that he relied on press release and publication in newspaper he have made sales over and above ₹ 1.00 Crore and had also filed return GSTR 4 declaring these figures. The applicant has submitted that he is a small dealer having his shop at small town, is not very much literate and not aware about legal procedure and provisions. Now he came to know that after GST Council Meeting, Department issues Notification and only after notificat
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
r return filer since 09.07.2010 in VAT regime. The applicant is registered in present GST regime as general category and has filed GSTR-3B monthly return in the period from April-18 to November-2018 in F.Y. 2018-19. The applicant has not filed any return in the F.Y. of 2017-18 and therefore has been served a notice in this regard. 4. PERSONAL HEARING (PH) In the matter, the applicant was asked to appear before authority for personal hearing on 28.01.2019 at 03.30PM. Shri Dilip Gupta, authorised representative appeared on the said date and stated that advance ruling sought is in response to query which is more of technical/ system error rather than fact of law. He reiterated the submissions already made in the advance ruling application. 5. FINDINGS. ANALYSIS & CONCLUSION: We observe that the questions raised by the applicant are of the past period i.e. 2017-18. As per the 'Definitions' as mentioned in Section 95(a) of the CGST & RGST Act 2017 which is reproduced as unde
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =