This weekly round- up analytically summarizes the key stories related to the GST Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) and Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR), reported at Taxscan.in during the previous week of 4th to 10th of December, 2022.
With Test Measures Spherea Solutions Limited seeking an advance ruling on the questions as to whether the services provided by the company to its parent company, related to test bunches in the name of maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO), could be classified under the head of 9987i(a) of No 25i(a) of notification No. 11/2017 Central Tax rate, and as to whether the company could avail 5% of GST concession under the mentioned head, the Karnataka Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has held that the GST concession cannot be availed for the same, as the service of supply of test bunch equipment was not an ingredient in building aircraft.
The Maharashtra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAAR ) has, recently in an appeal filed before it, held that any amount collected towards charges collected under “Unparallel Health Insurance Scheme” ,will not be subjected to the levy of GST in terms of entry at SI. No. 74 of the exemption Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (R) dated 28.06.2017. The aforesaid observation was made by the Appellate Authority’s coram comprising of Dr D.K. Srinivas, Member (Central Tax) and Shri Rajeev Kumar Mital, Member (State Tax), wherein they modified the ruling of the Maharashtra Authority who imposed GST at the rate of 18%(CGST @9%+SGST @9%), upon the nominal charges charged by the appellant from the public who intended to avail the health care services from the Appellant in future at the concessional rate scheme. “The charges collected under the “Unparallel Health Insurance Scheme” are to be considered as an advance towards the provision of the health care services to the subscribers of this scheme, and accordingly, any amount collected towards this scheme will not be subjected to levy of GST in terms of the entry at SI. No. 74 of the exemption Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (R) dated 28.06.2017”, the Appellate Authority held.
With the applicant who is a dealer of the products satin rolls and taffeta rolls used as label rolls for the purpose of printing wash care instructions and fabric contents, seeking an advance ruling in respect of classification of products of satin rolls and taffeta rolls with sizes between 19mm and 40mm, the Karnataka Authority for Advance Ruling( AAR ) has held that the products Satin Rolls and Taffeta Rolls used in the garments industry with sizes between 19mm and 40mm are classified under Custom Tariff heading 5807 and hence that the same will attract 12% GST.
While Shobha .L, on behalf of the applicant submitted that some of the vendors classified the said product under HSN 5806 attracting GST rate 5% and others classified the same under HSN 5807 attracting 12% GST rate , and hence that the said products are appropriately classifiable under HSN 5807, the aforesaid ruling was given by the two member bench of Authority of Advance Ruling, consisting of M P Ravi Prasad (Additional Commissioner commercial Taxes) and Kiran Reddy T (Additional Commissioner Custom & Indirect Taxes) , who observed that satin rolls and taffeta rolls are woven products consisting of wrap and weft and are not assembled by means of adhesive and hence that the impugned products are not covered Under Tariff (Custom Tariff Act, 1975) heading 5806.
The Chhattisgarh (AAR) has recently, in an application filed before it, held that rejected or damaged paddy seeds though not fit for Human Consumption, would still attract 5% of GST. The aforesaid observation was made by the AAR Bench consisting of Sonal K. Mishra, Joint Commissioner and Abhinav Aggarwal, Additional Commissioner , in an application filed before them by M/s Shraddha Traders, seeking ruling regarding classification and applicability of GST on the sale of rejected paddy seeds informed to be unfit for human consumption but usable for Industrial Usage, Cattle Feed Production, Manure Production etc, wherein the bench held that “ purely based on the description of the goods mentioned in the tender or agreement document with the Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Marketing Federation, i.e., rejected or damaged paddy (not fit for human consumption), would merit classification under chapter heading 100610, subject to stipulations and conditions, but that such supply of “rejected paddy” or “damaged paddy” is not eligible for the full tax exemption.
In an application filed before it by M/S Shree Powertech, engaged in the business of rendering works contract services related to modification, renovation & maintenance of roads & highway projects etc, the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling has ruled that subcontractors are not eligible for GST concession rate on shifting electrical utilities which was a part of highway construction by the main contractor.
The aforesaid ruling was given by the Authority when the applicant has sought an advance ruling from it, on the question as to whether the activity carried out by the applicant falls under Heading 9954: Entry No. 3(iv)(a) of Notification No. 11/2017-CT(R) and is liable to tax @ 12%, i.e., whether the same falls under composite supply and as to whether the applicant was eligible for GST concession rate, wherein the Bench of West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) consisting of Brajesh Kumar Singh (Joint Commissioner) and JoyjitBanik (Senior Joint Commissioner) held that the activities being carried out by the applicant as a subcontractor could not be regarded as a composite supply of works and GST concession, as main contractor would not be applicable on the applicant.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
