(JAN 15-21, 2023)
This weekend summary provides an analytical synopsis of the most major stories of Goods and Service tax Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) and Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) that were authored at Taxscan.in during the one week from January 15 to 21, 2023
The Bangalore Appellate Advance Ruling Authority bench of Ranjana Jha and Shikha C determined that no Goods and Service Tax exemption would be available to supply of parts and accessories of hearing aid.The bench arrived at the conclusion that under the subheading 902140 of the heading 9021 of the Custom Tariff Act the hearing aids excluding the parts and accessories were exempted from GST and the bench dismissed the appeal on all grounds.
The Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) bench of Rama Mohan Rao and TR Ram Nani of Ruled that the supply of garbage tipper vehicles by TATA Motor Vehicle would attract 28% of Goods and Service Tax.
The decision making authority note that that the vehicle manufactured by the applicant could not be termed as the special purpose vehicle and the certificate issued by the applicant itself had mentioned the vehicle as a good carrier.
The Uttar Pradesh Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) bench of Rajendra Kumar (Additional Commissioner CGST) and Vivek Arya (Joint Commissioner SGST) ruled that the services provided to State Urban Development Agency (SUDA) and for Project Management Consultancy (PMAY) in relation to functions entrusted under Article 243w and 243G of the constitution would be qualified as pure services.
The authority conclude that State Urban Development Agency (SUDA) and PMAY which had been established as the state level nodal agency under urban employment and poverty alleviation program could be treated as an activity under Article 243M and 243G of the constitution.
The Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) bench of Amit Kumar Mishra and Milind Kavatkar ruled that 12 percentage GST would be applicable on the potato products like salted and flavoured potato chips, mixture, sev mamara etc.The Authority observed that the supply of potato products like salted and flavoured Potato Chips, Potato Sev, Potato Chivda, etc. were pre-packaged and labelled hence would not be eligible for GST @5% as per entry No. 10lA of Not. No. l/2017-CT.
The Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) Maharashtra bench comprising M. Rammohan Rao and T.R. Ramnani
decide that Input Tax Credit (ITC) is not available on goods and services consumed for the construction of a pipeline which was laid outside the factory premises. The authority further observed that pipelines laid outside factory premises are not covered within the term ‘plant and machinery’ as per Explanation to Section 17(5)(c) and 17(5)(d) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”), and therefore the inputs used for construction of such pipeline outside the factory are not eligible to Input Tax Credit (“ITC”)
Bench of Ranjana Jha and Ms. Shikha C of the Karnataka Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) quashed an advance ruling against online apparel platform Myntra wherein the AAR held that 18% GST leviable on the sale of internet advertisement space.They observed that that the services provided by them qualifies in all respects as an ‘export of service’. There is no disagreement with the findings of the Advance Ruling Authority that they meet the conditions in clauses (i), (ii), (iv) and (v) of Section 2(6) of the IGST Act which defines ‘export of service’; that they also meet condition (iii) of the definition in as much as the place of supply is outside India and they justified this by relying on Section 13(2) of the IGST Act which they claim is applicable in their case. He submitted that no other sub-section in Section13 applies to them.
The Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) bench of M. Rammohan Rao and T.R. Ramanani ruled that the Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) would be applied to transfer of monetary proceeds by IVL India under the reverse charge mechanism.The authority further determined that the applicant had received support services from IVL Sweden, which was located in a non-taxable territory, the entire integrated tax leviable under Section 5 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act should be paid on the reverse charge basis by the applicant for such services.
The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) bench of Brajesh Kumar Singh and JoyjitBanik decided that sub -contractor activities of shifting electrical utilities for construction of NH 34 project cannot be regarded as composite supply of work.Further they observed that The activities being carried out by the applicant as a subcontractor for shifting of electrical utilities for construction of Proposed 4-Laning of Barasat – Krishnagar Section of NH-34 Project cannot be regarded as composite supply of works contract by way of construction of road as specified under serial number 3(iv)(a) of Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate).
The Karnataka Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) bench of Dr M. P. Ravi Prasad and Sri. Kiran Reddy T ruled that they can’t rule on the utilization of ITC available in the Electronic Credit Ledger under the provision of Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST), 2017.The authority observed that the issue of utilization of ITC is available in the Electronic Credit Ledger and the question is not covered under the issues specified in Section 97(2) of the CGST Act 2017. The third question is about the utilization of the amount available in their Electronic Cash Ledger towards discharge of GST liability on rental/lease income, which is not covered under the issues specified in Section 97(2) of the CGST Act 2017.
The Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) bench of Milind Kavatkar and Amit Kumar Mishra has ruled that, 12% Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) applicable on Geomembrane and is classified under HSN 5911. The AAR further ruled that the product comes under tariff item 59111000.The bench ascertained that the contested goods, Geomembranes, have purely technical uses because they are used in aquaculture ponds along with Biofloc technology, a bacterial colony-based culture that is highly beneficial in preventing disease and creating an ecologically sustainable symbiotic system.
The Andhra Pradesh Authority for Advance Ruling bench of D. Ramesh, the Commissioner of State Tax and Sri. RV Pradhamesh Bhanu, the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax
ruled that the scanning and processing of exam results are exempted from GST. The aforesaid ruling was made by the Authority of Advance Ruling when an application was filed before it by M/s. Universal Print Systems,the authorit observed that With reference to the services provided by the applicant, they are nothing but services relating to admission to, or conduct of examination by, such institution, falling under Sl No 66 of the said exemption notification of No. 12/2017-CGST [Rate], dated 28.06.2017 as amended.”
The Andhra Pradesh Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) bench consisting D. Ramesh, the Commissioner of State Tax and Sri. RV Pradhamesh Bhanu, the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax. has recently, in an application filed before it, ruled that the printing of mark cards, grade cards and certificates is exempted from GST.The aforesaid ruling was made by the Authority of Advance Ruling when an application was filed before it by M/s. Universal Print Systems, the applicant, who is engaged in the business of printing including high-end security printing products from the year 2011.
The bench of Sri B. Raghu Kiran, IRS, Additional Commissioner (Central Tax) and Sri S.V. Kasi Visweswara Rao, Additional Commissioner (State Tax)Telangana State Authority for Advance Ruling has ruled that the supply of telecommunication services to the local authority, is taxable under GST. The authority determined that “The applicant is providing data and voice services to GHMC and to the employees of the municipalities and there is no direct relation between the services provided by the applicant and the functions discharged by the GHMC under Article 243W read with schedule 12 to the Constitution of India. Therefore, these services do not qualify for exemption under Notification No. 12/2017, and for the reasons mentioned above, the supply of telecommunication services to local authority is a taxable service”.
The Maharashtra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) bench consisting D.K. Srinivas and Rajiv Kumar Mittal has ruled that project management consulting services will fall under the head of “Other technical and scientific services nowhere else classified” and attracts 18% GST. The authority observed that the activities, which merit classification under SAC 998621, are like physical performance or activities which are being directly used in the mining and extraction operations whereas the services provided by the Appellant are not so as the said services are like review, monitoring, management and supervision of the project works which are done towards the realization of mining activities.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
