Page 126 - GSTL_16 April 2020_Vol 35_Part 3

340 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 35
 Their application made before this authority on 15-8-2019 is still a
valid application.
They requested to take up the application and the written submissions filed by
them on 26-9-2019 and give the ruling as there is no bar on the part of the author-
ity to proceed in the subject matter and pass order or give clarification, which is
statutorily permissible under Section 98 of GST Law.
4.1 The applicant was heard again on 7-11-2019. The authorised repre-
sentative appeared before the authority and stated that prayer in the WP does
not mention the GST though para 12 of the WP mentions GST authorities as 3rd
respondent to decide the applicability of GST. They further stated that they are
going to file an affidavit before Hon’ble High Court to remove the GST authori-
ties as 3rd respondent. They stated that they will submit copy of withdrawal or-
der after which they requested for another hearing.
4.2 Further to the hearing held on 7-11-2019 the applicant submitted the
order copy of Madras High Court dated 14-11-2019 for the WP 24412 of 2019 and
WMP No. 24145 of 2019 vide their letter dated 27-11-2019 and requested for a
further hearing. It is seen from the submissions that the Advance Ruling Au-
thority is made a party to the writ filed along with the State Jurisdictional Offic-
ers. Hon’ble Court admitted inclusion of the new respondents. Further the Court
in Para 3 and Para 4 of the Order have ordered as under :
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
Petitioner had made an application for advance ruling on the applicability
of Goods and Services Tax in respect of the tender, which forms the subject
of this writ petition, before the sixth respondent, and in view of the first
proviso to Section 98(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017,
seeks a clarification from this Court for enabling the Sixth Respondent to
pass orders in that application.
4. Having regard to the facts involved in this case, and in particular, the
Counter Affidavit dated 12-11-2019 filed by the Third Respondent, the pen-
dency of this Writ Petition shall not preclude the Sixth Respondent from
deciding the aforesaid application for advance ruling said to have been
made by the petitioner.
5.1 The applicant accordingly was extended another opportunity to be
heard in person on 11-12-2019. The authorised representative appeared for the
hearing. They submitted copies of order passed by the Hon’ble Judge in WMP
No. 32267 of 2019 in W.P No. 24412 of 2019 where the Advance Ruling Authority
and SGST authorities have been made as respondent. In the order, it was di-
rected by the Hon’ble Judge that the views of advance ruling authority in the
GST issue of the applicability has a bearing in the W.P. In the W.P. filed, the ap-
plicant has stated in para 12 that they are making GST authorities as 3rd re-
spondent as the issue of applicability is to be decided. The representative has
stated that they did not file for any withdrawal of the 3rd respondent, GST au-
thorities before Hon’ble High Court. The applicant stated that they will submit
the tender, bid documents, quotations, advertisement for contract within 2 days.
They stated that they have submitted the application online on 15-8-2019 and WP
on 19-8-2019 but had submitted the copy on 18-9-2019 to the Advance Ruling
Authority. They stated that Advance Ruling Authority should pass an order on
merits as the WP in High Court is not regarding GST applicability.
5.2 The applicant submitted the following documents on 13-12-2019 :

GST LAW TIMES  16th April 2020  246