Rectification application which is beyond the statutory limit of six months as prescribed under Section 102 of CGST Act/MGST Act, 2017 is delayed and barred by limitation is not found tenable

0
133

Rectification application which is beyond the statutory limit of six months as prescribed under Section 102 of CGST Act/MGST Act, 2017 is delayed and barred by limitation is not found tenable

In Shri J.J. College of Architecture Consultancy Cell (GST AAR Maharashtra)

(Under Section 102 of the Central Goods and Services Tax/Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)

In the case of applicant, M/s. Shri J.J. College of Architecture Consultancy Cell, holder of GSTN 27AAJAS7455FIZ4, an advance ruling order was passed under Section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, vide order No. GST-ARA-54/2018-19/B-128 Mumbai, dated 12.10.2018.

The Applicant has submitted a letter on 10.10.2019 for rectification of advance ruling er dt. 12.10.2018 and referred to the following para in the order;

“However we find that the applicant has not provided the copies of contract, entered into by them with MCGM which would in detail give the exact nature of activities being done by them and which would be very crucial in deciding whether the services being provided by the applicant are in the nature of pure services or works contract services.”

In the above context, the applicant in his application has submitted that, the agreement copy was already submitted to the office of advance ruling during the hearing on 26th July 2018. The applicant has submitted the acknowledgment copy of this submission of the agreement (dated 26th July, 2018) along with the hard copy of agreement. Further, the applicant has referred to the e-mail sent by him on 27.12.2018 to the office of advance ruling on this subject. The copy of mail is also submitted with this application. Considering the facts of the case, applicant has requested this authority to rectify the order as referred above.

  1. The subject matter was fixed for hearing. Shree Suresh Porwal C.A. attended on 20.11.2019. The error brought to notice by the applicant vide rectification applicant dt. 10.10.2019 is verified from the record.
  1. This Authority is vested with the power to rectify the error, which are apparent from the record under the provisions of Section 102 of CGST Act/MGST Acct, 2017. For the sake of clarity and ready reference, the provisions of section 102 are reproduced below:

“102. The Authority or the Appellate Authority may amend any order passed by it under section 98 or section 101, so as to rectify any error apparent on the face of the record, if such error is noticed by the Authority or the Appellate Authority on its own accord, or is brought to its noticed by the concerned officer, the jurisdictional officer, the applicant or the appellant within a period of six months from of date of the order:

Provided that no rectification which has the effect of enhancing the tax liability or reducing the amount of admissible input tax credit shall be made unless the applicant or the appellant has been given an opportunity of being heard”.

In the present matter, the applicant’s ARA order was passed by the authority on 12.10.2018, as per the document submitted on record at the time of final hearing. On going through the record, it is seen that, the applicant has not provided any copies of contact, entered into by them with MCGM at the time of hearing. Therefore, the applicant’s contention that such copies were submitted during hearing is not accepted. Further, the applicant has filed rectification application on 10.10.2019 which is beyond the statutory limit of six months as prescribed under Section 102 of CGST Act/MGST Act, 2017. It is delayed and barred by limitation. Therefore, the said application is not found tenable under scope of rectification. Hence it is rejected.

 ORDER

(Under Section 102 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)

No. GST-ARA- 54/2018/Rectification -3/2019-20/B-118

Mumbai, dt. 03/12/2019

Considering the facts on record and provisions under Section 102 of CGST Act/MGST Act, the application for rectification is barred by limitation and not maintainable. Hence it is rejected.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here