Section 98(2): "Already Pending or Decided" — the Admission Bar

Section 98 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.

More applications fail at admission than on the merits. The reason is almost always the first proviso to section 98(2).

Section 98(2): the Authority may, after examining the application and the records called for and after hearing the applicant and the concerned officer, by order either admit or reject the application. First proviso: the Authority shall not admit the application where the question raised is already pending or decided in any proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the provisions of this Act. Second proviso: no application shall be rejected unless an opportunity of hearing has been given to the applicant. Third proviso: where the application is rejected, the reasons shall be specified in the order.

The three limbs of the bar

"The question raised in the application." Identity of question, not merely identity of subject. Where an ongoing proceeding concerns the same issue on the same facts, the bar operates even if the periods differ.

"Already pending or decided." Both. A concluded proceeding on the question bars an application as surely as a pending one.

"In any proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the provisions of this Act." Two features:

• "any proceedings" — read widely in practice, and taken to include scrutiny under s.61 and an ASMT-10 notice, an audit under s.65 where the issue has been raised, an investigation and summons on the issue, a show cause notice, an appeal, and an earlier advance ruling application;
• "in the case of an applicant" — the applicant's own proceedings. A proceeding against a different taxpayer on the same question does not bar the application.

Why the timing decision is really a strategy decision

The bar produces a narrow window, and it closes in one direction only.

Before any proceeding begins, the application is admissible.

Once a scrutiny notice, an audit query or a summons touches the issue, the window has closed for that question.

Two consequences follow.

Apply early or not at all. Where a new product, a new model or a new contract raises a genuine question, the application should go in before the first return reporting it is scrutinised — not after a notice arrives.

An application is not a defence. Filing an ARA-01 in response to a scrutiny notice, hoping to move the question to a more favourable forum, does not work. The proviso bars admission, the fee is spent, and the rejection order records that the question was already under proceedings.

The procedural protections

Section 98(1) — on receipt of an application, the Authority shall forward a copy to the concerned officer and, if necessary, call upon him to furnish the relevant records; and where records are called for, they shall as soon as possible be returned to that officer.

So the officer knows about the application from the outset and is heard at the admission stage. That is worth factoring in: the application itself puts the issue on the department's file.

The second proviso — no rejection without a hearing. An order rejecting an application without an opportunity of being heard is bad on the face of the section.

The third proviso — reasons must be specified in the rejection order. A rejection recording only that the application "is not maintainable" does not satisfy it.

Section 98(3) — a copy of every order under sub-section (2) is sent to the applicant and the concerned officer.

After admission

Section 98(4): where an application is admitted, the Authority shall, after examining such further material as may be placed before it by the applicant or obtained by the Authority, and after providing an opportunity of being heard to the applicant or his authorised representative as well as to the concerned officer or his authorised representative, pronounce its advance ruling on the question specified in the application.

Three things to note:

Further material may be filed. The application is not the last word; additional material may be placed before the Authority.

Both sides are heard. The applicant and the concerned officer, each in person or through an authorised representative.

The ruling is on the question specified in the application. Which is why the framing in the ARA-01 matters so much — the Authority answers the question asked, not the question intended. Section 97(2) →

Preparing for the admission hearing

1. Confirm no proceeding touches the question. Check every GSTIN of the applicant: the notices and orders tab, any ASMT-10, any ADT-01 or ADT-02, any summons, any pending appeal, and any earlier ARA-01.
2. Say so expressly in the application. A declaration that the question is not pending or decided in any proceeding, made accurately, meets the proviso head-on.
3. Where a proceeding exists on a different question, distinguish it — the periods, the issue, and why the question in the application is not the one under proceedings.
4. Bring the documents. The contract, the specification, the pricing, the accounting treatment.
5. Ask for the hearing if a rejection appears likely — it is a statutory right under the second proviso.
6. Where rejection is ordered, check that the reasons are specified. A rejection without reasons is the strongest basis for a writ, since s.100 gives an appeal only against a ruling pronounced under s.98(4), not against a rejection at admission.

That last point is important and often missed: there is no statutory appeal against a rejection at the admission stage. The remedy is a writ petition, which makes the recorded reasons the whole battleground.

Key takeaways

• The first proviso to s.98(2) bars admission where the question is already pending or decided in the applicant's own proceedings.
• "Any proceedings" is read widely — scrutiny, audit, investigation, notice, appeal, or an earlier application.
• A proceeding against a different taxpayer does not bar the application.
• Apply before a proceeding touches the issue; an application is not a defence to a notice.
• No rejection without a hearing, and the reasons must be specified in the order.
• Section 100 gives no appeal against a rejection at admission — the remedy is a writ.

Read next

• Section 97(2): The Seven Questions You Can Actually Ask
• What an Advance Ruling Cannot Decide
• Section 98(6): Ninety Days, and What Happens When It Slips
• When to Seek an Advance Ruling, and When Not To

Disclaimer: Positions stated as on 5 September 2026, based on the CGST Act and Rules as amended to 31 March 2026 (ICAI Bare Law, 12th edition). The scope given to "any proceedings" reflects the approach taken in practice by Advance Ruling Authorities and is not a statutory definition.