Page 191 - GSTL_3rd September 2020_Vol 40_Part 1

2020 ] IN RE : VARDHAN HOLIDAYS 125
the Companies Act, 1956, the rates of depreciation has been provided for “Rail-
way Siding”, categorized under the head ‘plant & machinery’. This notion of the
Appellant is misplaced inasmuch as in the Companies Act, 2013 the said scenario
stands changed. In Schedule II [“Useful Lives to Compute Depreciation”] at Part
C under the head Nature of assets, at IV Plant & Machinery continues to be men-
tioned, whereas Railway siding is out of this inclusion and it finds mention at IX.
Thus contrary to Appellant’s contention, Railway Siding stands excluded from
the head “Plant & Machinery”.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and discussions
as above, we dispose of the instant appeal filed by M/s. NMDC, the Appellant
by passing the following order :-
ORDER
11. The ruling so sought by the Appellant is accordingly answered as
under :-
In view of the above, there is no merit in the appeal filed by the Appel-
lant M/s. NMDC having GSTIN 22AAACN7325A3Z3, against the Ad-
vance Ruling Order No. STC/AAR/03/2019, dated 24th April, 2019
passed by the AAR, Chhattisgarh and accordingly the said order is up-
held.

_______

2020 (40) G.S.T.L. 125 (A.A.R. - GST - UK)
BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING UNDER GST,
UTTARAKHAND
S/Shri Vipin Chandra and Amit Gupta, Members
IN RE : VARDHAN HOLIDAYS
Advance Ruling No. 03/2020-21, dated 8-7-2020 in Application No. 12/2019-20
Advance Ruling - Scope of - Admissibility of Input Tax Credit (ITC)
on goods/services received for construction of immovable property pending
before High Court - Application on same issue to be rejected - Section 98 of
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. - Authority shall not admit the applica-
tion where the question raised in the application is pending or decided in any proceedings
of an applicant under any of the provisions of this Act. No application shall be rejected
under this sub-section unless the opportunity of hearing given to the applicant. Where
the application is rejected reasons of such rejection shall be specified in the order. “Appli-
cant has been defined under Section 95(c) of the Act which means any person registered
or desirous of obtaining registration under this Act. Thus in light of said definition we do
not find force in the applicant’s argument inasmuch as the “applicant” means any person
registered under this Act and it could be best interpreted that the legislative intent in its
wisdom is to draft the relevant proviso to empower the Authority to reject the application
in the cases where there is repeated filing of the application before the Authority on the
same issue which is either pending for decision or already decided. [paras 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13]
Application rejected
GST LAW TIMES  3rd September 2020  207