Page 183 - GSTL_6th August 2020_Vol 39_Part 1

2020 ] IN RE : CEAT LTD. 109
95, the term ‘advance ruling’ means a decision provided by this authority to the
applicant on matters or questions specified in Section 97(2), in relation to the
supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be under-
taken by the applicant. As per provision of Section 95 of CGST Act, this authority
can give a ruling to the applicant on matters or questions raised, in relation to the supply
of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the appli-
cant.
5.2.2 The question No. 1 raised by the applicant is not in relation to the
supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be under-
taken by the applicant. This question may be raised only by ihe concerned dealer
and not by the applicant. Hence in view of the provisions of Section 95 of the
GST Act, we are of the opinion that this authority is not allowed to answer the
question raised by the applicant, being out of the purview of Sec. 95 of CGST Act.
5.3 Further, the applicant has placed reliance on the decision of Appel-
late Authority for Advance Ruling in MRF Ltd. reported at 2019-TIOL-61-AAAR-
GST = 2019 (27) G.S.T.L. 578 (App. A.A.R. - GST). The said order was passed by
the Appellate Authority on an appeal filed by MRF Ltd. against Order No.
5/AAR/2019, dated 22-1-2019 [2019 (23) G.S.T.L. 193 (A.A.R. - GST)], passed by
the Advance Ruling Authority, Tamil Nadu.
5.3.1 In the said case the applicant in the original instance was filed by
MRF Ltd. and the question was “Whether the MRF Ltd. can avail the ITC of the
full GST charged on the supply of invoice or a proportionate reversal of the same
is required in case of post purchase discount given by the supplier of the goods
or services.
5.3.2 We find that in the said referred case the applicant had raised
question for themselves whereas in the subject case, the question asked by the
applicant pertains to third party, i.e. Whether their dealers are required to re-
verse input tax credit proportionate to the reduction in the value of supply.
5.3.3 Therefore the said referred decision of the Appellate Authority is
not applicable in this case.
5.4 The second query of the applicant is :- “Whether the applicant can is-
sue commercial credit note to its dealers for post sale discounts without charging GST?”
5.4.1 Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, states that the question on
which the advance ruling is sought under this Act, shall be in respect of, -
(a) classification of any goods or services or both;
(b) applicability of a notification issued under the provisions of this
Act;
(c) determination of time and value of supply of goods or services or
both;
(d) admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been
paid;
(e) determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or
both;
(f) whether applicant is required io be registered;
(g) whether any particular thing done by the applicant with respect to
any goods or services or both amounts to or results in a supply of
goods or services or both, within the meaning of that term.
GST LAW TIMES  6th August 2020  183