AAR rejects Application on Ground of Lack of Locus Standi as Applicant being Recipient of Service : Calcutta HC directs to Reconsider Application [Read Order]

A Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya of Calcutta High Court set aside the order of the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling (WBAAR) and remanded the case to the same Authority for Advance Ruling to reconsider the application.

The bench observed that the appellants being registered dealers under the provisions of the West Bengal Goods and Services Act, 2017 (WBGST Act) would fall within the definition of “applicant” as defined under Section 95(c), though the appellants therein were not parties to the proceedings before the AAR.

The appellants filed the writ petition challenging an order passed by the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling, Goods and Services Tax, by which the application filed by the appellants for an advance ruling was rejected on the ground the appellants have no locus standi to file such an application.

Further, a Single Bench by the impugned order has relegated the appellants to the appellate authority under the Act to agitate the correctness of the order passed by the advance ruling. Aggrieved by such order, the appellants have preferred the present appeal.

The panel observed that the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling had made a fragile attempt in the impugned order in the writ petition to address the question of who is the applicant before the AAR seeking an advance ruling and came to the conclusion that the appellants, as recipients of service, are not entitled to maintain an application before the AAR.

The term “applicant” has been defined under Section 95(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, to mean any person registered under the Act or desiring to do so.

According to the bench, the term “applicant” has been construed in the broadest sense feasible to encompass any individual registered under the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling Act or seeking registration.

Further, the bench observed that the application filed by the appellants would fall under clause (b), Section 97(2) as the appellants seek for a ruling as regards applicability of an exemption notification no.12/2017- CGST (Rate) dated 28th June, 2017.

Conclusively, the Coram held that it will be well within the jurisdiction of the AAR to consider the application on merits rather than rejecting the same on the ground of lack of locus standi.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates