The appellant, M/s. Padmavathi Hospitality & Facilities Management Services sought the advanced ruling on the issue whether services provided by Padmavathi Hospitality & Facilities Management Services (PHFMS) to DME are classifiable as a function entrusted to a Panchayat or a Municipality under the constitution. If not then can we conclude that no exemption is available to PHFMS.
However, the AAR rejected the application and said that the decision of the High Court on the writ will be applicable on the GST authorities who are also the respondents in the writ. This Authority functions within the limitations prescribed under Section 97 and 98 of the GST Act 2017. In as much as the State/Center Jurisdiction authorities are respondents to the Petition before High Court and the subject matter revolves on the leviability of GST.
The appellant urged that the AAR ought to have considered the order of the High Court dated November 14, 2019 wherein it is clearly stated that on request of the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner seeking clarification from the court in view of the first proviso to section 98(2) of the central goods and service tax act 2017 to enable the sixth respondent to WP namely AAR to pass orders in that application, the Judge Justice Audikesavulu has passed order stating that the pendency of the Writ petition 24412 dated August 19, 2019 shall not preclude the AAR from deciding the application made by the Petitioner namely the PHFMS.
The AAAR consisting of M.A.Siddiqui and G.V.Krishna Rao held that The Order of the Advance Ruling Authority was right, since at the material time there was a petition filed by the appellant, pending before the Hon’ble High Court in this matter. Therefore, there is no need to interfere with the order of the AAR; however, the appellant is free to file a fresh application before the AAR, if he wishes to do so, since there is no pending proceedings at the High Court.Subscribe Taxscan AdFree to view the Judgment