There is no error/apparent mistake on the face of the record in advance ruling order, hence the instant application is not valid and is liable for rejection, in terms of Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Rectification of mistake- In the instant case, applicant has filed an application for rectification of mistake (ROM) alleging a mistake in the Advance Ruling order.
The Applicant had sought advance ruling, in their original application in respect of the question, along with other question, that Whether statutory contributions made to District Mineral Foundation (DMF) and National Mineral Exploration Trust (NMET) as per MMDR Act, 1957 amount to "supply" and whether the same is liable for GST under reverse charge?
The applicant filed the instant application, for rectification of aforesaid ruling, alleging that the authority has not ruled in the order as to whether the contributions towards DMF & NMET amount to supply in terms of Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 or not and also the authority erred in considering the said payments as single payment whereas they are two different transactions.
The AAR authority ruled that the contributions made towards DMF & NMET are not separate transactions but are on account of the supply made & are directly linked to the royalty payable; also computed as a fixed percentage of royalty and hence are treated as part of the consideration payable for the Licensing Services for right to use minerals including exploration and evaluation.
Held that- it is clearly evident from the aforesaid AAR Order that the authority has considered all the submissions and issued the proper order. Hence there is no error/apparent mistake on the face of the record, in the said order and hence the instant application is not valid and is liable for rejection.
There is no error/apparent mistake on the face of the record in advance ruling order, hence the instant application is not valid and is liable for rejection, in terms of Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Rectification of mistake- In the instant case, applicant has filed an application for rectification of mistake (ROM) alleging a mistake in the Advance Ruling order.
The Applicant had sought advance ruling, in their original application in respect of the question, along with other question, that Whether statutory contributions made to District Mineral Foundation (DMF) and National Mineral Exploration Trust (NMET) as per MMDR Act, 1957 amount to "supply" and whether the same is liable for GST under reverse charge?
The applicant filed the instant application, for rectification of aforesaid ruling, alleging that the authority has not ruled in the order as to whether the contributions towards DMF & NMET amount to supply in terms of Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 or not and also the authority erred in considering the said payments as single payment whereas they are two different transactions.
The AAR authority ruled that the contributions made towards DMF & NMET are not separate transactions but are on account of the supply made & are directly linked to the royalty payable; also computed as a fixed percentage of royalty and hence are treated as part of the consideration payable for the Licensing Services for right to use minerals including exploration and evaluation.
Held that- it is clearly evident from the aforesaid AAR Order that the authority has considered all the submissions and issued the proper order. Hence there is no error/apparent mistake on the face of the record, in the said order and hence the instant application is not valid and is liable for rejection.