The Rajasthan Authority for Advance Ruling has rejected an application by a goods transport agency as not maintainable under the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, holding that the question raised — whether the applicant’s services to another GTA are exempt under Entry 22(b) of Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) or taxable under Notification No. 11/2017-CT (Rate) — was both already pending in enforcement proceedings and already decided in the applicant’s own case. The ruling by Members Mahipal Singh and Dr. Akhedan Charan in RAJ/AAR/2026-27/15 (M/s Mahesh Transport Company, decided 07.08.2026) demonstrates the rigorous application of the statutory bar against overlapping proceedings.
The Enforcement Wing had conducted a search under Section 67(2) and treated the applicant’s outward supply of making available its vehicles to other GTAs as an exempt supply under Entry 22(b), on which basis ITC reversal under Rules 42/43 was being investigated. Additionally, the Joint Commissioner (Business Audit) had already passed an order for FY 2021-22 confirming a demand on the same characterisation issue. The AAR found that both limbs of the proviso — ‘already pending’ and ‘decided’ — were attracted, and declined to enter upon the merits. The ruling is notable for the detailed analysis of whether parallel consignment notes can be issued by two GTAs for the same movement of goods.
- 2026-juristway.com-2619-AAR(Rajasthan)-GST | AAR Rajasthan | RAJ/AAR/2026-27/15 | 07.08.2026