10- 12 -2018 - Views: 253

JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON INDIRECT TAXES AND RECENT ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER GST

Statute: Goods and Services Tax           

Decision in favour of:     Department

Title: Union of India and Another  v.

Mohit Mineral Pvt. Ltd. (Civil Appeal Nos. 10177 with 10179 of 2018)

----------------

Mohit Mineral Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Others (Transferred Case (C)

No. 9 of 2018) --------------

A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan JJ.

 October 3, 2018.

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 1 (SC)

Bench/Court: In The Supreme Court of India

Legislative Powers-Goods and Services Tax-Parliament-Levy of Cess for Compensation To States for Loss of Revenue Arising on Account of Implementation of Goods and Services Tax-Within Competence of Parliament-Goods and Services Tax (Compensation To States) Act (15 of 2017), s. 8-Goods and Services Tax Compensation Cess Rules, 2017-Constitution of India, arts. 246, 246A, 248-Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016, ss. 18, 19-Central Goods and Services Tax Act (12 of 2017)-Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act (13 of 2017).

Double Taxation-Goods and Services Tax and Cess for Compensation To States-Two Separate Imposts-Permissible.

Set-Off-Clean Energy Cess Already Paid-Cannot Be Set Off Against Payment of Goods and Services Tax Compensation Cess.

Tax-Cess With Respect To Goods and Services Tax-Is Tax

Words and Phrases-“With Respect To”, “Law”, “Cess”.

 

Statute: Goods and Services Tax

Decision in favour of:Directions

Title:

Dhamtari Krishi Kendra

v.

Union of India and Others

-------------------

Sanjay K. Agrawal J.

May 14, 2018.

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 37 (Chhattisgarh)

Bench/Court: In The Chhattisgarh High Court

Goods and Services Tax-Transition Provisions-Input Tax Credit-Inability of Dealers To Upload Form TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 Owing To Technical Difficulty-Writ Petition-Grievance Cell Set Up By Government and Nodal Officers Appointed To Facilitate Matters-Direction To Dealer To Approach Nodal Officer-Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act (7 of 2017)-Circular No. 39/13/2018 GST Dated April 3, 2018.

 

Statute: Goods and Services Tax

Decision in favour of: Directions

Title:

MSR Iron and Steel Industries India  Private Limited and Others

v.

Joint Commissioner of Sales Taxes, Coimbatore Division, Coimbatore and Others

-----------------

 K. Ravichandrabaabu J.

  August 21, 2018.

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 50 (Mad)

Bench/Court: In The Madras High Court

Goods and Services Tax-Migration-Declaration Forms-Excise Duty Credit-Petitioners Unable To Take Excise Duty Credit In Stock of Goods on Introduction of Goods and Services Tax Act-To Lack of Clarity In New Transition Provisions Under Goods and Services Tax Act-Writ Petitions Seeking Mandamus Directing Second Respondent To Take Action, Including Reopening Common Portal and Extending Time Period for Filing Declaration In Form Gst TRAN-1-Direction To Petitioners To Submit Applications In Accordance With Circular Issued on April 3, 2018 By Board Before Concerned Nodal Officer-Central Goods and Services Tax Act (12 of 2017), s. 140-Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act (19 of 2017), s. 140-Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, r. 117-Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, r. 117.

Statute: Service Tax

Decision in favour of:Department

Title:

N and N Chopra Consultants Pvt. Ltd. v.

Principal Commissioner, Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, Delhi East

-------------

S. Ravindra Bhat and A. K. Chawla JJ.

July 24, 2018.

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 77 (Delhi)

Bench/Court: In The Delhi High Court

Service Tax-Penalty-Failure To Pay Tax-Evasion of Tax-Assessee Aware of Its Service Tax Liability But Filing Returns Claiming No Liability-Paying Tax Upon Apprehension of Investigation and Adverse Orders-Deposit of Tax Before Issuance of Show-Cause Notice Per Se Would Not Absolve Assessee of Duty To File Returns-Levy of Penalties Justified-Amendments Making Imposition of Penalties Under Sections 76 and 78 Mutually Exclusive Prospective and Not Applicable To Earlier Periods-Finance Act (32 of 1994), ss. 76, 78.

 

Statute:  Value Added Tax

Decision in favour of: Assessee

Title:

Shihabudheen P. v.

State of Kerala

------------------------

K. Vinod Chandran and Ashok Menon JJ. 

June 26, 2018.

 

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 115 (Ker)

Bench/Court: In The Kerala High Court

Value Added Tax-VAT Authorities-Penalty-Best Judgment Assessment-Estimation-Note Book Revealed In Shop Inspection Showing Enhanced Consideration At Rs. 10,500, Rs. 10,650, Rs. 12,000 and Rs. 12,000 Against Four Lorry Loads of Sand-Intelligence Officer Estimating Entire Loads Transported At Average Value of Rs. 10,500 Till Date of Shop Inspection and Imposing Penalty At Twice Tax Sought To Be Evaded-Not Permissible As Authority To Carry Out Best Judgment Not Available To Officer Acting Under Section 67-Order Levying Penalty Set Aside With Direction To Intelligence Officer To Compute Tax Sought To Be Evaded In Four Loads, and Levy Penalty At Twice Amount Sought To Be Evaded-Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (30 of 2004) s. 67.

Value Added Tax-Assessment-Best Judgment Assessment-Supply of Sand-Note Book Showing Enhanced Consideration Against Four Lorry Loads of Sand-Assessment Order Passed Placing Reliance on Circular No. 5/2008 Categorizing Type of Vehicles Transporting Sand and Fixing Price for Sand That Could Be Transported In Full Capacity of Vehicle-Circular Brought on February 14, 2008, Not Retrospective-Transactions Made After February 14, 2008 To Be Assessed At Consideration As Shown In Circular-Bills Not Showing Specific Capacity of Vehicle-Matter Remitted-for Earlier Transactions, Petitioner Entitled To Produce Registration Certificate of Vehicle To Indicate Capacity and Turnover To Be Assessed on Basis of Existing Market Conditions In Subject Year-Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (30 of 2004).         

 

Statute:  Value Added Tax

Decision in favour of:Assessee

Title:

Commercial Tax Officer-I, Wadakkancherry and Another v.

C. R. Varghese

-----------------------

K. Vinod Chandran and Ashok Menon JJ. 

June 6, 2018.

 

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 137 (Ker)

Bench/Court: In The Kerala High Court

Value Added Tax-Returns-Revised Returns-Prohibition

Against Revision of Returns-only When Dealer Proceeded Against for Defalcation Or Offence-Possible Claim By Dealer To Benefit Available In Statute If Bona Fide Not Reason To Deny Permission To Revise Return-Application for Revision of Return Made With Audited Statement-Dealer Seeking Permission To Revise Return To Include Purchase of Capital Equipment Not Disclosed In Return Leading To Claim To Input-Tax Credit-Assessment Re-Opened and Completed Without Taking Into Account Offence and Intelligence Officer Independently Levying Penalty While Application for Revision of Return Pending With Assessing Authority-Not Cases Where Permission for Revision of Return To Be Denied-Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (30 of 2004), ss. 21(2), 22(9), (10), 42(2), 79B.

 

Statute:  Service Tax

Decision in favour of:Assessee

Title:

T. M. Motors Pvt. Ltd. v.

C. G. S. T., C. and C. F., Alwar 

-----------

V. Padmanabhan (Technical Member) and

Mrs. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) 

June 22, 2018.

 

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 176 (CESTAT-New Delhi)

Bench/Court:  Before The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal - New Delhi

Service Tax-Liability To Tax-Assessee A Dealer In Cars and Also Undertaking Servicing of Cars-Discounts In Price of Car Received By Assessee on Basis of Various Target Based Incentives Permitted By Manufacturers-Not Taxable-Spare Parts and Consumables Sold To Customer While Providing Service-Value Added Tax Paid Thereon-Service Tax Not Leviable-Finance Act (32 of 1994).

Service Tax-Cenvat Credit-Entire Amount of Common Input Services for Which Cenvat Credtt Availed of Reversed By Assessee-No Justification for Amount To Be Paid Under Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules-Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, r. 6(3).

 

Statute:  Value Added Tax

Decision in favour of:Department

Title:

Deepak Fertilisers and Petrochemicals

Corporation Ltd. v.

State of Maharashtra and Others

 ------------------

S. C. Dharmadhikari and Prakash D. Naik JJ. 

July 26, 2018.

 

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 182 (Bom)

Bench/Court:  In The Bombay High Court

Value Added Tax-Goods and Services Tax-Natural Gas-Concessional Rate of Tax-Change of Law-Effective Rate of Tax After Input-Tax Credit Three Per Cent. Under Value Added Tax Law-Rate of Tax After Coming Into Force of Goods and Services Tax Law Becoming 13.5 Per Cent. Owing To Automatic Cancellation of Erstwhile Registration-To Remove Difficulty Notification Dated August 24, 2017 Reducing Rate of Tax To 3 Per Cent. In Case

of Registered Dealers-Second Notification Dated October 13, 2017 Extending Concessional Rate of Tax To Taxable Persons Under Goods and Services Tax Law-Trade Circular Cannot Be Basis To Allow Concessional Rate of Tax To Taxable Under Goods and Services Tax Law Applicable From Date of First Notipication-Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (9 of 2005),ss. 9(1), 16(6A) ; Sch. B, Entry 16-Notification No. VAT-1517/CR-136(A)/Taxation-1 Dated August 24, 2017-Notification No. 1517/C.R.136(A)/Taxation-1 Dated October 13, 2017-Trade Circular No. 39T of 2017 Dated September 8, 2017-Trade Circular No. 3T of 2018 Dated January 16, 2018.

 

Statute:  Value Added Tax

Decision in favour of: Department

Title:

S. Jobi     v.

State of Kerala

 --------------

K. Vlnod Chandran and R. Narayana Pisharadi JJ.  

June 4, 2018.

 

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 217 (Ker)

Bench/Court:  In The Kerala High Court

Value Added Tax-Best Judgment Assessment-Estimation-Penalty-Offence-Undeclared Godown Detected on Inspection, Discrepancy Noticed At Head Office of Dealer and Penalty Imposed for Stock Variation and Offence of Having Undisclosed Godown-Estimation By Assessing Authority At Four Times Value of Stock, Detected on Inspection Regarding Undeclared Godown and Two Times Addition In Addition To Actual Suppression With Respect To Variation of Stock At Head Office-No Attempt By Dealer To Prove Goods Detected From Undeclared Godown Entered In Account Books-Valid Presumption of Habitual Transactions Outside Books of Account In View of Undeclared Godown Detected In Middle of Year-No Question of Law Involved Warranting Interference-Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (30 of 2004), s. 44(10).

 

Statute:  Goods and Services Tax

Decision in favour of:Directions

Title:

EAP Infrastructures Private Limited  v.

Principal Chief Commissioner, Goods and Services Tax Act (Previously Central Excise Customs) Nungambakkam, Chennai and Others

  -------------

K. Ravichandrabaabu J.  September 4, 2018.

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 242 (Mad)

Bench/Court:  In The Madras High Court

Goods and Services Tax-Migration-Input-Tax Credit-GST TRAN-I Declaration-Writ Petition Seeking Mandamus Directing First Respondent To Enable Petitioner To File GST TRAN-1 Declaration Electronically To Avail of Input-Tax Credit Which Could Not Be Done Due To Lack of Clarity In New Transition Provisions Under Goods and Services Tax Act-Direction To Petitioner To Submit Application In Accordance With Circular Dated April 3, 2018 To Concerned Officer for Forwarding It To Nodal Officer Who After Consultation With GSTN Would Forward It To Grievance Committee, for Taking Decision-Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act (19 of 2017).

Statute:  Goods and Services Tax

Decision in favour of: Department

Title:

Advantage India Logistics Pvt. Ltd.

v.

Union of India and Others

 --------------

Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal and Sunil Kumar Awasthi JJ. 

August 23, 2018.

 

Citation: [2018] 58 GSTR 247 (MP)

Bench/Court:  In The  Madhya Pradesh High Court- Indore Bench

Goods and Services Tax-Writs Under Constitution-Alternative Remedy-Goods and Services Tax Authorities-Inter-State Supply-Seizure-Jurisdiction-Officers Appointed Under Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, Authorized To Be Proper Officers for Purposes of Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act-Goods Transported In Vehicle From Haryana To Maharashtra-Finding By Respondent 4 That E-Way Bill Defective, Show-Cause Notice Issued To Inspect Vehicle and Seizure Order Passed on Inspection-Writ Petition Challenging Action of Respondent 4

Authorized Under Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act As Without Jurisdiction In Absence of Notification Under Section 4 of Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act-Dismissed In View of Availability of Statutory Remedy of Appeal Against Final Order By Respondent 4 Directing Petitioner To Pay Tax and Penalty-Central Goods and Services Tax Act (12 of 2017)-Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act (13 of 2017), ss. 4, 20-Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act (19 of 2017), ss. 68, 109, 129.

Statute:  Goods and Services Tax

Decision in favour of: Department

Title:

Willowood Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.

v.

Union of India 

 -------------------

Akil Kureshi and B. N. Karia JJ. 

September 12, 19, 2018.

 

Citation:  [2018] 58 GSTR 310 (Guj)

Bench/Court:  In The Gujarat High Court

Goods and Services Tax-Change of Law-Transition Provisions-Input-Tax Credit-Prescription of Time-Limits Within Which Necessary Declarations Must Be Made In Order To Avail of Credit Under Existing Law Against New Tax-Not Unreasonable, Or Arbitrary-No Existing Or Vested Right Taken Away-Commissioner Empowered To Extend Date In Respect of Registered Persons Who Could Not Submit Declaration By Due Date on Account of Technical Difficulties-Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act (25 of 2017), s. 140(1), second prov.-Central Goods and Services Tax Act (12 of 2017), s. 164-Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957, r. 12-Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, r. 117-Guiarat Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, r. 117. 

Interpretation of Taxing Statutes-Change of Law-Prescription of Time-Limts-Must Be Construed In Light of Legislative

Intent To Bring Finality To Claims, Credits, Transfers of Such Credits and Issues Related Thereto.

 

Statute:  Goods and Services Tax

Decision in favour of: Directions

Title:

Jai Baba Amarnath Industries

v.

State of U. P. and Others

  ----------------

Ashok Kumar J. 

July 10, 2018.

 

Citation:  [2018] 58 GSTR 351 (All)

Bench/Court:  In The Allahabad High Court

Goods and Services Tax-Appellate Tribunal-Seizure Proceedings Carried Out on Ground Goods Transported From Punjab To U. P. Not Accompanied By E Way Bill and Penalty Imposed-Appeal Before First Appellate Authority Dismissed With Direction To Petitioner To Deposit Disputed Amount-Writ Petition Contending Appellate Tribunal Not Constituted-Principal Secretary (Tax and Institutional Registration) Civil Secretariat, To File Personal Affidavit By Providing All Details Regarding Non Establishment of Tribunal Till Date and Steps Taken By Respondent-Authorities-Direction To Release Goods and Vehicle on Furnishing of Bank Guarantee As Indicated-Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act (1 of 2017), ss. 107(1), 109, 110, 111, 112, 129(3).

 

Statute:  Goods and Services Tax

Decision in favour of: Directions

Title:

Jai Baba Amarnath Industries

v.

State of U. P. and Others 

---------------------

Ashok Kumar J.  July 10, 2018.

 

Citation:  [2018] 58 GSTR 351 (All)

Bench/Court:  In The Allahabad High Court

Goods and Services Tax-Appellate Tribunal-Seizure Proceedings Carried Out on Ground Goods Transported From Punjab To U. P. Not Accompanied By E Way Bill and Penalty Imposed-Appeal Before First Appellate Authority Dismissed With Direction To Petitioner To Deposit Disputed Amount-Writ Petition Contending Appellate Tribunal Not Constituted-Principal Secretary (Tax and Institutional Registration) Civil Secretariat, To File Personal Affidavit By Providing All Details Regarding Non Establishment of Tribunal Till Date and Steps Taken By Respondent-Authorities-Direction To Release Goods and Vehicle on Furnishing of Bank Guarantee As Indicated-Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act (1 of 2017), ss. 107(1), 109, 110, 111, 112, 129(3).

 

Statute:  Central Sales Tax

Decision in favour of: Assessee

Title:

J. R. Exports v.

Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kadapa District, A. P. and Others

  --------------------

C. V. Nagarjuna Reddy and Smt. Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi JJ.  

December 15, 2017.

Citation:  [2018] 58 GSTR 398 (T & AP)  

Bench/Court:   In The Telangana and Andhra Pradesh High Court

 

Central Sales Tax-Sale In Course of Export-Form H-Defective Forms-Dealer Entitled To Opportunity of Removing Defects-Revision-Dealer In Reply To Notice Requesting Return of Forms So That Defects May Be Cured-Rejection of Forms Without Opportunity To Dealer To Cure Defects and Resubmit Forms-Violation of Principles of Natural Justice-Order Set Aside With Direction To Revisional Authority To Return Forms To Dealer With Liberty To Dealer To Resubmit Them After Curing Defects-Central Sales Tax Act (74 of 1956), s. 5(4)--Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957, r. 12(10).

 

Statute:   Goods and Services Tax

Decision in favour of:Assessee/Department

Title:

Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v.

State of U. P. and Others (and Other Cases)

 ----------------

Sudhir Agarwal and Ifaqat Ali Khan JJ. 

September 18, 2018.

 

Citation:  [2018] 58 GSTR 419

(All)Bench/Court:   In The Allahabad High Court

 

Goods and Services Tax-Seizure of Goods-Goods Under Transport-Documents To Be Carried With Goods-Change of Law-Rule 138 Coming Into Force on February 1, 2018 Providing Complete Procedure Including Forms-Erstwhile Rule 138 Ceased To Be Operative on and After February 1, 2018-Forms Consistent With New Rule 138 Not Made Available on Portal-Show-Cause Notices and Final Orders for Failure To Download E-Way Bill 01 and/Or 02 Referring To Government’s Notification Dated July 21, 2017 and Commissioner’s Circular Dated August 9, 2017, Not Sustainable-Not A Case of Intention of Evasion of Tax-Central Goods and Services Tax Act (12 of 2017), ss. 68, 129(1), (3), 164-Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act (1 of 2017), ss. 68, 129(1), (3),  164-Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act (13 of 2017), s. 20-Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, r. 138-Notification No. 1014 Dated July 21, 2017-Constitution of India, arts. 246A, 269A-Notification No. KA.NI-2-138/XI-9(42)/17-U.P. Act-1-2017-Order-(101)-2018 Dated January 30, 2018-Notification No. KA.NI-177/XI-9-(42)/17-U. P. Act-1-2017-Order-(109)-2018-Lucknow Dated February 6, 2018-Notification KA.NI-2-155/XI-9(42)/17-UPGST-Rules-2017-Order-( 103)-2018-Lucknow Dated January 31, 2018-Notiftcation No. KA.NI-2-487/XI-9(42)/17-U.P. GST Rules-2017-Order-(120)-2018 Dated March 26, 2018-Notification No. KA.NI-2-498/XI-9(42)/17-UP-Act-1-2017-Order-(121)-2018-Lucknow Dated March 27, 2018-Circular No. 1102 Dated August 9, 2017-Circular No. SA.DA.GST/MAAL Parivahan/2017-18/2017/Vanijya Kar Dated July 22, 2017.

Goods and Service Tax-Search and Seizure-Officers of State Competent To Act for Search, Seizure and Imposition of Penalty In Respect of Violation of Central Enactments.

Goods and Services Tax-Search and Seizure-Writ Petition Against Show-Cause Notice-Not Maintainable-Constitution of India, Art. 226.  

B.RECENT ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER GST

Application for advance ruling can be made in respect of supply ‘being undertaken’. Thus, a person can apply even in respect of activity he is already doing, though really that is not the idea of ‘Advance Ruling’.

Questions for which advance ruling can be sought

The question on which the advance ruling is sought shall be in respect of any of following [section 97(2) of CGST Act].

(a) classification of any goods or services or both under the Act.

(b) applicability of a notification issued under provisions of the Act

(c) determination of time and value of the goods or services or both.

(d) admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid.

(e) determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or both.

(f) whether applicant is required to be registered.

(g) whether any particular thing done by the applicant with respect to any goods or services or both amounts to or results in a supply of goods or services or both, within the meaning of that term.

Section 100(1) of CGST Act is in respect of appeal filed before Appellate Authority against ruling of Advance Ruling Authority.

Authority for Advance Ruling in each State

Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has been constituted in each State. The AAR normally consists of two officers. The Central Government and the State Government shall appoint an officer not below the rank of Joint Commissioner as member of the Authority for Advance Ruling.

Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) has also been constituted in many States.

The Authority for Advance Ruling will give a decision on question raised before it. Such ruling will be binding on the applicant and the department. The decision is not similar to decision of Tribunal. The decision of Tribunal is binding on others who were not party to the case.However, ruling of AAR and AAAR is binding only on appellant. Even in case of department, it is binding only in respect of that applicant and not in other cases.

So far, over 150 decisions of AAR have been reported wherein there are some conflicting rulings also.

Though ruling of Authority for Advance Ruling does not have value as precedence, it surely has persuasive value. Since many controversial issues are coming before AAR, it would be educative to study them, as many of these decisions may come before Tribunal, High Court and Supreme Court in due course.

THE AUTHORITY ON ADVANCE RULINGS IN KARNATAKA
GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA, KALIDASA ROAD GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 009
Advance Ruling No. KAR ADRG 24 / 2018

Dated : 25th October, 2018
Name and address of the applicant: M/s Nash Industries (I) Pvt Ltd., 236-237/2, 8th Main Road, Peenya Industrial Area, 3rd Phase, Bengaluru - 560058
ORDER UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 98 OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX ACT, 2017 AND UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 98 OF KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017
1.The applicant has sought advance ruling in respect of the following questions:
“Whether the amortised cost of the tool to be added to arrive at the value of the goods supplied for the purpose of GST under Section 15 of the CGST Act read with rule 27 of CGST Rules?”
R U L I N G
The amortised cost of tools which are re-supplied back to the applicant free of cost shall be added to the value of the components while calculating the value of the components supplied as per the Section 15 of the CGST /

SGST / IGST Act 2017. KERALA AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING
GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT
TAX TOWER KILLIPALAM, KARAMANA P.O.  THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 002

Advance Ruling No. CT/531/18-C3
Dated: 26th March 2018
Name and address of the applicant: M/s Caltech Polymers Pvt. Ltd.,   Malappuram
1.The applicant has sought advance ruling in respect of the following question:
“Whether reimbursement of food expenses from employees for the canteen provided by company comes under the definition of outward supplies as taxable under GST Act?”
R U L I N G
It is hereby clarified that recovery of food expenses from the employees for the canteen services provided by company would come under the definition of ‘outward supply’ as defined in Section 2(83) of the Act, 2017, and therefore, taxable as a supply of service under GST.

GOA AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS
VIKRIKAR BHAVAN, MAHATAMA GANDHI ROAD, 
PANAJI, GOA- 4030001.

Advance Ruling No. GOA/GAAR/4 of 2018-19/2429
Dated : 4th October, 2018
Name and address of the applicant: M/s Goa Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., 3rd Floor, Paryatan Bhavan, Patto, Panaji, Goa
ORDER UNDER SECTION 98 OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX ACT, 2017 AND UNDER SECTION 98 OF GOA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 
1.The applicant has sought advance ruling in respect of the following question:
“Whether GST is applicable on One Time Concession Fees Charged by us in respect of our property namely Anjuna property given to M/s Myrayash Hotels Pvt. Ltd. on for a long term lease of 60 years for development of infrastructure for financial business on Private Investment mode on DBFOT basis (Design, Build, Finance, Operate and Transfer) providing exclusive right, license and authority to construct, operate and maintain the project?”
R U L I N G
The service provided by the applicant in the instant matter , is not falling nder the criterion mentioned at Sr. No. 41 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 as amended by the Notification No. 32/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 13.10.2017. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for the benefits of the said notification and the activity of long term lease is liable for levy of GST.

AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING GOODS & SERVICE TAX UTTRAKHAND 
GST, EBLOCK, NEHRU COLONY, DEHRADUN

Advance Ruling No. 10/2018-19
Dated: 22nd October 2018
Name and address of the applicant: M/s NHPC Limited, Admin. Building, Tanakpur Power Station. Banbasa, Uttrakharrd 
1.The applicant has sought advance ruling in respect of the following question:
(a) “Whether they are required to pay GST under reverse charge in terms of Notification No. 13/2017 dated 28-06-2017 while making payment to PWD, Uttarakhand for construction of road;”
(b) “What is the time of supply when advance payment is released to PWD, Uttarakhand.”
(c) “Whether the amount deposited with Central Fund i.e Uttranchal CAMPA and reimbursed by MEA considering as part cost of the road is liable for GST.”
R U L I N G
1.No GST is applicable on the activity of the applicant since the same falls under exempted services in terms of Notification No. 12/2017 –Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 (as amended time to time).
2.On the issues of time of supply and applicability reimbursernent, no provisions of GST is applicable on said supply of service in question falls under exempted services.

WEST BENGAL AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING 
GOODS AND SERVICE TAX 
14 BELIAGHATA ROAD, KOLKATA – 700 015

Advance Ruling No. 02 /WBAAR/ 2017-18
Dated : 22nd Jaanuary, 2018
Name and address of the applicant: M/s Global Reach Education Services Pvt Ltd, Unit 7W, The Millenium, 235/2A, AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-700020
 1.The applicant has sought advance ruling in respect of the following question:
“Whether the service provided to the Universities abroad is to be considered “export” within the meaning of Section 2(6) of the Integrated Goods and Services Act, 2017 ?”
R U L I N G
It the present case whatever services the applicant provisions are provided only as a representative of the University and not as an independent service provider. Being an intermediary service provider, the place of the Applicant’s supply shall be determined under section 13(8) (b) of the IGST Act and not under section 13(2) of the IGST Act. The place of supply under the above legal framework is the territory of India. As the condition under section 2(6)(iii) of the IGST Act is not satisfied, the Applicant’s service to foreign universities does not qualify as “Export of Services”, and is, therefore, taxable under the GST Act. In view of the foregoing, the services of the applicant are not “Export of Service” and are taxable under the GST Act. 
 

Share This