Page 146 - GSTL_2nd April 2020_Vol 35_Part 1

48 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 35
be deemed to be the Appellate Authority in respect of that State or Union
territory.”
Section 100 reads as follows :
“Section 100. Appeal to Appellate Authority. - (1) The concerned officer,
the jurisdictional officer or an applicant aggrieved by any advance ruling
pronounced under sub-section (4) of Section 98, may appeal to the Appel-
late Authority.
(2) Every appeal under this section shall be filed within a period of thirty
days from the date on which the ruling sought to be appealed against is
communicated to the concerned officer, the jurisdictional officer and the
applicant :
Provided that the Appellate Authority may, if it is satisfied that the appel-
lant was prevented by a sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within
the said period of thirty days, allow it to be presented within a further peri-
od not exceeding thirty days.
(3) Every appeal under this section shall be in such form, accompanied by
such fee and verified in such manner as may be prescribed.”
14. In this context, it is relevant to note that Section 20 of the IGST Act,
which deals with application of provisions of the CGST Act and the said Section
20 of the IGST Act provides that subject to the provisions of the said Act and the
rules made thereunder, the provisions of the CGST Act relating to the matter
enumerated thereunder shall, mutatis mutandis, apply, so far as may be, in rela-
tion to integrated tax as they apply in relation to central tax as if they are enacted
under the IGST Act, etc. In that regard, clause (xviii) of Section 20 coming under
Chapter IX of the IGST Act expressly enumerates “advance ruling” as one of the
matters concerned and hence in view of the provisions contained in Section
20(xviii) of the IGST Act, the abovesaid provisions contained in Secs. 97 to 100,
etc. of the CGST Act relating to advancing ruling shall mutatis mutandis, apply as
far as may be in relation to integrated tax, as they apply in relation to central tax,
as if they are enacted under the IGST Act.
15. After appreciating the abovesaid aspects, the Advance Ruling Au-
thority has proceeded to hold that as per the submissions of the petitioner, it is
evident that the question raised is whether the supply made by the petitioner
would qualify as “export of service” as defined in Section 2(6) of the IGST, 2017
and that therefore, the question would essentially and substantially involve the
determination of place of supply, etc. Thereafter, the Advance Ruling Authority
has proceeded to hold that the issue to be determined is one relating to the place
of supply of service and then such an aspect may not be subject matter of an Ad-
vance Ruling as envisaged in Section 97, for the simple reason on the ground that
the issue relating to the “determination of supply of service” as in the instant
case, is not covered by any of the provisions contained in Section 97(2) of the
CGST Act. Thus it is to be noted that the Advance Ruling Authority after having
held that in this case the supply of service is located in India and the recipient of
service is located outside India and in this case as the supply of service is located
in India and the recipient of services is located outside India, the Advance Ruling
Authority has thereafter proceeded to take the view that the other issue to be
determined, viz., the “place of supply of service” cannot be the subject matter of
advance ruling in terms of Section 97 of the CGST Act, etc. for the simple reason
that the determination of the issue of place of supply, is not enumerated in Sec-

GST LAW TIMES  2nd April 2020  210