Read on to know the recent AAR and AAAR matters covered at taxscan.in.
This round-up analytically summarises the key stories related to the Goods and Services Tax Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) and Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) reported at Taxscan.in during the period from March 15, 2025 to April 12, 2025.
GST Liability Remains even if Order is found to be Bogus: AAR
In Re: Acube Engitech Comp CITATION: 2025 TAXSCAN (AAR) 116
In a recent ruling, the Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that the liability to pay Goods and Services Tax (GST) remains intact even if the underlying order for goods is later found to be bogus. The decision came in response to an application filed by Acube Engitech Private Limited, which had sought clarity on its GST liability in light of a cancelled purchase order allegedly issued by Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL).
The AAR observed that the intention or authenticity of the recipient’s purchase order does not absolve the supplier of tax liability, especially when the supplier has undertaken the transaction in full, including the physical movement of goods and invoicing. It stated that there is no provision under the GST law that grants exemption from tax merely because the transaction was entered into under a mistaken or fraudulent representation by the recipient. The ruling was delivered by Amit Kumar Mishra, Joint Commissioner of State Tax, and Milind Kavatkar, Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, who jointly form the bench of the Gujarat AAR.
Master GST from A to Z! No more confusion: Click Here
AAAR Dismisses Mitsubishi Electric’s Appeal Due to 88-Day Delay, Cites Statutory Time Limitation
In Re: Mitsubishi Electric India Private Limited CITATION: 2025 TAXSCAN (AAAR) 112
In a recent ruling, the Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) dismissed the appeal filed by Mitsubishi Electric India Private Limited on grounds of delay, reinforcing the strict statutory time limitations prescribed under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. The AAAR held that the appeal, filed after a delay of 88 days, was beyond the permissible time period and therefore could not be entertained. The Authority stated that it lacked the power to condone delays exceeding the statutory limit, regardless of the reasons provided by the appellant.
In a recent ruling, the Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) dismissed the appeal filed by Mitsubishi Electric India Private Limited on grounds of delay, reinforcing the strict statutory time limitations prescribed under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. The AAAR held that the appeal, filed after a delay of 88 days, was beyond the permissible time period and therefore could not be entertained. The Authority stated that it lacked the power to condone delays exceeding the statutory limit, regardless of the reasons provided by the appellant.
The order was passed by a two-member bench comprising Dr. D. Anand, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, and Dr. Ram Niwas, Principal Chief Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry Zone, who jointly held that the delay was not condonable and accordingly dismissed the appeal.
General Motors’ Transfer of Buildings to Hyundai Treated as Service Not Sale, Attracts 18% GST: AAR Read More
AAAR upholds AAR Order: GST Advance Ruling Denied as DGGI Investigation Preceded Application
In Re: Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council CITATION: 2025 TAXSCAN (AAAR) 113
The Tamil Nadu State Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAAR ) has upheld the decision of the Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ), rejecting an application filed by the Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council seeking clarity on the applicability of GST on various fees collected by them.
The AAAR ruled that since the Directorate General of GST Intelligence ( DGGI ) had already initiated an investigation into the matter before the application was filed, the advance ruling could not be admitted under the first provision to Section 98(2) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017.
However, the AAAR, comprising Dr. Ram Niwas, IRS, and Dr. D. Jagannathan, IAS, disagreed with the council’s interpretation. The bench emphasized that the term “proceedings” under GST law has a broader scope and includes investigations, inquiries, and other pre-adjudication processes. Referring to Section 66 of the CGST Act, the AAAR noted that the phrase “any other proceedings” is used alongside terms like scrutiny, inquiry, and investigation, indicating that these activities are also considered proceedings under the law.
AAAR Upholds AAR Order: DGGI Summons Qualify as ‘Proceedings’ under GST, Bars TN Medical Council’s Advance Ruling
In Re: Tamil Nadu Medical Council CITATION: 2025 TAXSCAN (AAAR) 114
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) has upheld the Authority for Advance Ruling’s (AAR) decision that summons issued by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) constitute ‘proceedings’ under GST law, thereby barring the Tamil Nadu Medical Council (TNMC) from seeking an advance ruling on the taxability of its fees. The AAAR’s order reinforces that any ongoing investigation under GST provisions precludes applicants from obtaining advance rulings on the same matter.
The bench comprising Dr. D. Jagannathan, IAS, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, and Dr. Ram Niwas, IRS, Principal Chief Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, concluded that allowing advance rulings during active investigations would undermine GST’s procedural integrity. The order reaffirms that taxpayers cannot seek rulings to preempt or parallel ongoing inquiries by tax authorities. This decision sets a precedent for similar cases, clarifying that the term ‘proceedings’ u/s 98(2) includes all investigative actions, not just formal adjudications.
9 Shell Firms and ₹23.66 Crore GST ITC Fraud: Faridabad Sessions Court denies Bail to Accused Read More
Panasonic Wins Partial Relief in GST Ruling: AAAR Upholds FTWZ Tax Treatment but Exempts ITC Reversal
In Re: Panasonic Life Solutions India (P) Ltd. CITATION: 2025 TAXSCAN (AAAR) 115
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) has granted partial relief to Panasonic Life Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. in a significant GST case concerning supplies from Free Trade and Warehousing Zones (FTWZ). The authority upheld the tax-exempt status of such transactions under GST law while providing crucial relief by exempting the company from input tax credit (ITC) reversal requirements, except in cases involving duty-free shops.
On the critical issue of ITC reversal, the AAAR modified the AAR’s decision by limiting the requirement only to supplies made to duty-free shops at international airports. This interpretation aligns with Explanation 3 to Rule 43 of the CGST Rules, which specifically targets such transactions. For regular FTWZ operations, the AAAR ruled that no ITC reversal is necessary, providing significant compliance relief to Panasonic and similar businesses.
The bench comprising Dr. D. Jagannathan, IAS, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, and Ashish Varma, IRS, Principal Chief Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, emphasized the need to interpret GST provisions in harmony with customs and SEZ regulations
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
