The Karnataka High Court issued the notice to Centre in plea challenging the constitutionality of the composition Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) and Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR).
The Petitioner had approached the High Court assailing the ground that the composition of the AAR and AAAR in terms of Sections 96 and 99 of the CGST/ SGST Acts are completely contrary to the several Constitution Bench decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court namely Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, Union of India v. R. Gandhi, Madras Bar Association v. Union of India and Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Limited in as much as the said provisions envisage the appointment of only Technical members (i.e. non-Judicial/ Revenue members) as members of the coram of the said authorities.
The Petitioner contended that the provisions of the CGST/ KGST Acts are ultra-vires Article 14 and Article 50 of the Constitution and falls foul of the Doctrine of Separation of Powers and Independence of Judiciary.
The Petitioner challenged the legality of the order passed by the AAAR on the count of being perverse and unreasoned and also being non -est as the constitution of AAAR itself is illegal.
The division bench Bench comprising Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice V. Srishananda while taking note of the submissions made by the Petitioner, the High Court was pleased to issue notice to the Respondents fixing the matter on April 22, 2021.
