The West Bengal Bench of Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the contract bridge tournaments conducted in offline mode are not subject to tax as the applicant is not a supplier of Specified Actionable Claims u/s 2(102 A) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
In this case, the applicant, the Bridge Federation of India in the application filed before the WB Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) stated that it intended to organize an offline/physical tournament of bridge played for money in the state of West Bengal in near future.
The issue involved in the instant case is to determine the taxability under the Goods and Service Tax (GST) Act, 2017 in respect of the physical/offline game of bridge when played for money/prize.
Get a Copy of Learn the Essentials of Sections 269 and 271, Click here
Through the above-mentioned application, the applicant sought an advance ruling with respect to the question was whether participation fees, donations, and stakes be deemed as supplies of ‘specified actionable claims’ under Section 2(102A) of the GST Act, 2017 when they are utilized for the purpose of playing, organizing, and winning games or tournaments of the bridge when they are played for money.
The petitioner contended that the actionable claims between players are not taxable under the GST Act, 2017.
The bench observed that the expression ‘specified actionable claim’ under Section 2 (102A) of the GST Act, 2017 covers betting, casinos, gambling, horse racing, lottery, or online money gaming.
The bench was of the view that “Bridge” is not classified as a casino, horse racing, lottery, or internet money game, whether played in a physical or offline format.
Get a Copy of Learn the Essentials of Sections 269 and 271, Click here
The bench observed that organizing a bridge tournament for a fee, even if the playing of a bridge against money is considered a specified actionable claim, doesn’t make the organizer a supplier of such claims.
The applicant organized tournaments of the bridge with the contribution of money deposited in a common pool, and the organizer doesn’t have a lien on the contributed money.
The AAR bench, comprising of Dr Tanisha Dutta (Joint Commissioner, CGST & CX) and Joyjit Banik (Additional Commissioner), held that the applicant is not liable to pay tax while organizing a tournament of physical games of contract bridge when played for money as the applicant is not a supplier of specified actionable claims.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
