An advance ruling helps the applicant in planning his activities, which are liable for payment of GST, well in advance. It provides certainty and transparency to a taxpayer with respect to an issue which may potentially cause a dispute with the tax administration. Further, it helps in avoiding long drawn and expensive litigation later. The advance ruling given by the Authority can be appealed before an Appellate authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR).
“Advance ruling” means a decision provided by the Authority or the Appellate Authority to an applicant on matters or on questions specified in sub-section (2) of section 97 or sub-section (1) of section 100 of the CGST Act, 2017, in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. Under the present dispensation, advance rulings can be given only for a proposed transaction, whereas under GST, Advance ruling can be obtained for a proposed transaction as well as a transaction already undertaken by the appellant.
An advance ruling pronounced by AAR or AAAR shall be binding only on the applicant who has sought the advance ruling and on the concerned officer or the jurisdictional officer in respect of the applicant. This clearly means that an advance ruling is not applicable to similarly placed other taxable persons in the State. It is only limited to the person who has applied for an advance ruling.
A registered person as well as any other person desirous of obtaining registration can apply for Advance Ruling on the following matters, as prescribed under the Act with the prescribed fee.
a) Classification of any goods or services or both;
b) Applicability of a notification issued under the provisions of this Act;
c) Determination of time and value of supply of 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.
Now let’s analyse the judicial interpretations given by the Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) and Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) in various cases with reference to the stories published in Taxscan.in.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled on the classification of Tank and Tank Parts. The applicant, M/s. Heavy Vehicles Factory, HVF Estate, Avadi is a Central Government Department coming under the Ordnance Factory Board, Ministry of Defense, and Government of India and is engaged in the manufacturing of Tank and Tank Parts. They are registered under GST.
The Authority ruled that the tank is classified under CTH 8710 0000 while parts which satisfy the essential conditions i.e., they must be identifiable as being suitable for use solely or principally with Tanks and must not be excluded by the provisions of the Notes to Section XVII and must not be more specifically included in elsewhere in the Nomenclature are only to be classified as ‘Parts’ under CTH 8710 0000.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that Tamil Nadu Labour Welfare Board liable to make GST registration.The applicant has sought the ruling on the issue in respect of applicability of GST registration to Tamil Nadu Labour Welfare Board and applicability of GST towards the rental income received by the board from Government and business entities and applicability of Reverse Charge Mechanism on for the rent on immovable properties received by the board from Government and business entities.
The coram of KurinjiSelvaan V.S. and Senthil Velavan B. ruled that Tamil Nadu Labour Welfare Board, being a person liable to pay GST, has to get registered under GST. The rental income received by the applicant from Government and business entities are taxable to GST.
The Authority of Advance Ruling in Tamil Nadu has ruled that, the input tax credit (ITC) is not available on the input services used exclusively for providing exempt services of health services to inpatients such as laundry services used for inpatients. The AAR also said that, For Input services such as housekeeping, leasing of equipment used for both exempt supply of health services to inpatients and taxable supply of medicines etc. to outpatients, the appropriate ITC eligible is determined by Rule 42 of the CGST Rules 2017 and TNSGST Rules as amended read with Section 17 (2\ of CGST / TNGST Act 2017.
The AAR bench of CGST Member Manasa Gangotri Kata and TNGST Member KurinjiSelvaan V.S observed that, Medicines, consumables and implants used in the course health care services to in-patients by the applicant is the supply of Inpatient Services classifiable under SAC 99931 1.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (TN AAR) ruled that the services provided by the United Planters Association of Southern India (UPASI), a non- profit organisation to its registered members on the payment of amount towards subscription above ₹1000 is taxable.
The panel of N. Usha and R. Gopalasamy ruled that the applicant is eligible to claim exemption vide serial number 77A of Notification No. 12/2017 Central Tax (Rate) as amended by Notification No. 14/2017 Central Tax (Rate) in respect of subscription received from natural persons who are farmers simpliciter and the annual aggregate subscription amount for all membership, under various nomenclature, up to Rs.1000.
Although the oil is marketed as lamp oil, the Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) declared that the classification may only be done based on the components of the item and not the end use of the oil.The bench of N. Usha and R. Gopalasamy observed that the RBD Palmolein Oil is a fraction of Palm Oil obtained by a process called fractionation.
Furthermore, it was noted that the production procedure for their “Roobini”-branded edible RBD palmolein is the same as the production process for Mahara Jyothi. Mahara Jyothi has no additives added, and its packaging bears the same FSSAI licence number as that for Roobini Refined Palmolein because both products go through the same manufacturing procedure.The authority ruled that the Mahara Jyothi oil, which is an edible RBD Palmole in without any additives or mixture of other oils, is classifiable under the Tariff Head 1511 90 20.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (TN AAR) ruled that 18% Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) is applicable on the mattresses supplied to the educational institutions of both Karnataka State and other states. The Applicant, Hosur Coir Foams Private Limited, submitted that they are manufacturer and supplier of Rubberized Coir Mattresses and Bare Blocks and claims that their supply to educational institutions are exempted.
The panel of N. Usha and R. Gopalasamy ruled that the mattresses, classified by the applicant under HSN 940429, supplied by the applicant in the State of Tamil Nadu to hostel students of Government Schools, educational institutions of Government of Karnataka under Department of Social Welfare, through M/ s Coir Industrial Co-operative Society Limited is liable to 18% IGST. Additionally, it was stated that the same 18% IGST rate will be applicable to other states also.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (TNAAR) determined that services, including services of common employees provided by a branch office to the head office and vice versa shall be subject to GST obligation under the relevant acts.The panel of N. Usha and R. Gopalasamy stated that the statutory provisions of the Central Goods and Services Act (CGST Act), 2017, any supply of service between two registrations of the same person in the same State or in different States attract the provisions of Section 25 (4) and Section 7 read with Schedule I (2) and Section 15.
Section 25(4) of CGST Act, states that ‘a person who has obtained or is required to obtain more than one registration, whether in one State or Union territory or more than one State or Union territory shall, in respect of each such registration, be treated as distinct persons for the purposes of this Act.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the civil contracts provided by the applicant to the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras attract 18% Goods and Services Tax (GST).The Applicant’s customer Indian Institute of Technology, Madras claimed that the rate of GST is 12% for Civil Contract Services with effect from 01.01.2022 even after amendment to Notification No.11/2017 C.T.(Rate) vide Notification No.15/2021 C.T.(Rate) dated 18.11.2021.
The panel of N. Usha and R. Gopalasamy observed that Section 3 (j) (iii) of The Institutes of Technology Act, 1961 that IIT, Madras is a ‘Society’ registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, conferred with the status of ‘body corporate’ by Section 4 (1) of the said Act for the promotion of science, education, diffusion of useful knowledge, etc. under the control of Central Government.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (TN AAR) bench consisting N. Usha (SGST member) and R. Gopalasamy (CGST member) allowed the application to withdraw the advance ruling application without going more into the detailed facts of the case. The authority noted that there was no need to make a decision in advance because the central government had revoked the notification on which the applicant wanted clarification by issuing a new notification.
The application was filed as an Advance Ruling Application (ARA) seeking the concessional rate of GST @ 5% on supply of scientific and technical instruments, apparatus, equipment to their customer.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that the Goods and Service Tax would be applicable on the products manufactured as pasteurised milk and milk cream in the name of “Jigarthanda”. The applicant Madurai Famous Jigarthanda LLP was engaged in manufacturing dairy products in the name of “Jigarthanda” packed in unit container with Brand name and also in loose form bearing details like name of manufacturer or branches or others as required by the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006(FSSAI) or other relevant Acts, to consumers.
It was ruled that “Jigarthanda” was a taxable goods as it was covered under Notification No.1/2017 CTR dated 28.06.2017serial No.50 of Schedule II as “Beverages containing milk” attracting CGST at 6% and SGST at 6% vide serial No.50 of Schedule II of G.O. (Ms.) No. 62 dated 29.06.2077 for intra state supply. It attracts 12% IGST vide serial No.50 of Schedule II of Notification No. 1/2017 Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 under HSN 2202 99 30.
The Tamil Nadu state Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAAR ) has stated that Goods and Service Tax (GST) would be applicable to work contract services for the construction of residential quarters for the employees of Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL).
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) of Mandalika Srinivas, Member (Centre) And Dheeraj Kumar, Member (State) held that, as per amendment made to the entry 3(vi) of Notification No. 11/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 vide Notification No. 15/202l-C.T.(Rate) dated 18.11.2021 effective from 01.01.2022, ‘Government entity’ would be omitted in the class of recipients. Therefore, the applicable rate of tax for the above work would be 9% of COST plus 9% of SGST as per entry SI.No. 3(xii) of Notification No. 11/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 (as amended) read with the corresponding Notification under TNGSTA.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that 5% of Goods and Service Tax (GST) would be applicable to supply of dried Coconut manufactured and supplied by EMS COCO.
The Authority for Advance Ruling of R. Gopala swami (Additional Commissioner) and N. Usha (Joint Commissioner) observing the finance ministry circular 163/1923 GST held that, “The whole unbroken kernel could be taken out of the shell only when it converts to copra. The Applicant takes the copra cut into half, sun dries and segregates manually based on the round shape of copra, free of dirt/dust and sends it as edible copra and the rest of copra which are irregularly shaped, dusty are sent to oil milling units. But as the
The Tamilnadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has recently held that bus body building activity attracts 18 percent Goods and Service Tax. The applicant Royal coach builders is a proprietrix concern engaged in bus body building activity who are constructing the body over the chassis supplied by the customers according to their requirements.
After considering the submissions made by the applicant and central and state jurisdictional authorities the member of authority N Usha and R Gopalaswamy ruled that “activity of bus body building undertaking on the chassis supplied by the customer to the applicant amount to supply of service as per schedule II cause 3 Of CGST Act 2017 and will be attract 18% GST.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) held that the applicant, VBC Associates is not eligible for claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC), as per Section 17 (2) of the CGST /TNGST Act read with Rule 43(a) of CGST /TNGST Rules 2017, on the Goods/Services used in installation of Solar Power Panels, which are considered as Plant and Machinery.
The applicant has sought advance ruling on whether the input tax credit on solar power ruling is required panels procured and installed is blocked credit under section 17(5) (c) and (d) of CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 and admissibility of Input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid.The Two member bench of the Authority comprising TG Venkatesh and K Latha observed that goods/ Services for installation of Solar Power Panel are Plant and Machinery, ineligible for ITC.
In the case of Ola Electric Technologies Private Limited, Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that the transfer between two cost centers of the same entity for monetary value constructs supply and is liable to levy GST. The applicant stated that their company had a factory for the manufacture of electric two-wheelers in Tamil Nadu where the head office and the additional software development centre are in Bengaluru, Karnataka.
It was observed that any payment made or to be made/ the monetary value of any action in response to the supply of any goods/ services was included as consideration. Further viewed that the transfer of right to do integration testing, installation and marketing software from the applicant to Karnataka Cost centre is leviable to GST as the such transaction was executed between two distinct persons i.e., two cost centers of the same entity.
While considering the application for ruling on the classification of “Fly Ash Blocks” the Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling held that there will be no advance ruling if the applicant failed to substantiate the proposed transaction with the necessary document.
The Coram consists of Shri T G Venkatesh, I.R.S., Additional Commissioner and Smt. K Latha Joint Commissioner (ST) held that “the application made by them is pre-mature and does not fall under the ambit of the proposed transaction i.e., proposed supply of goods or services. Hence the application is not admissible.”
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has held that reimbursement of toll charges is liable to include in the value of supply and is taxable under GST Act. The applicant, NTL India Private Limited engaged in providing services namely rental services of road vehicles including buses, coaches, cars and other motor vehicles, with operator classified under HSN Code 996601 and other transport services classified under HSN Code 996799 and are discharging GST at appropriate rates.
Shri T G Venkatesh, I.R.S., Additional Commissioner and Smt. K Latha Joint Commissioner (ST) ruled that “the Applicant is a service provider of transportation services to their clients and the reimbursed toll charges should be included in the value of supply and tax be paid at the appropriate rates on the entire value of supply.”
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that the supply of medicines and consumables for providing health care services to inpatients are composite supply and attracts Nil rate of Goods and Services Tax.
The Authority observed that the hospital cannot provide health services including diagnostic, treatment surgery, etc. without the help of medicines to be taken during treatment and consumables used during their stay in the hospital. Hence, the supply of medicines and consumables are naturally bundled with the supply of health services, but once the patient is discharged the composite supply comes to an end, and the review of the patient after discharge cannot be considered as part of the composite supply. In the case of outpatients, it is not mandated to procure the pharmacy service from the hospital itself and it is only advisory.
The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR), Tamil Nadu has held that the supply of printed leaflets as per Content supplied by the recipient is a composite supply and attracts 18% Goods and Services Tax.
The Authority presided by Smt. K. Latha and Mr. T. G. Venkatesh has held that the printing of content provided by the recipient on the paper and materials of the applicant and supply of such printed leaflets to the recipient is a composite supply as defined under section 2(30) of the CGST/TNGST Act 2017 with ‘Supply of service of printing’ as the principal supply. The said supply is classifiable under SAC 9989 with 18% GST.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) holds support services to overseas customers are not export services since the taxable territory is the location where services are actually performed.
The Authority observed that the services are in the nature of ‘support services’ rendered for facilitating the vessel of the service recipient to enter or exit the Indian port. The services extended are to enable the vessel to reach the port, leave the port and undertake repair or requirements of the vessel and crew when such vessel is in the Indian territory. Thus, the service extended intrinsically relies on the presence of the vessel in the Indian territorial water or port.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR), presided by T G Venkatesh, Additional Commissioner, and K Lata, Joint Commissioner, has held that support services to overseas shipping lines/ charterers attract 18% GST.The Authority has held that the applicant’s business or proposed transaction is liable to be classified under SAC 9967 and attracts GST at the rate of 18% under Notification No. 11/2017.
The Authority observed that the applicant extends vessel-related services supporting the shipper to facilitate the entry or exit of the vessel in the Indian Ports. The services are more in the nature of support services for the transport of vessels and more aptly will be classifiable under SAC 9967. The proposed end-to-end service proposed by the applicant covers all the services specified in Group 99675, which also has an entry accommodating ‘other supporting services’ under 996759.
Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (Tamil Nadu AAR), held that provisions of specified services would qualify as support services hence taxable. The members present were T G Venkatesh, Additional Commissioner and K Lata, Joint Commissioner.The applicant intended to supply ‘support services’ in line with the classification under SAC Code 9985 so that the shipping lines/charterers are not worried about the paperwork or other routine & customary formalities involved for its shipments coming into India for further transport.
The Tamil Nadu AAR decided the ‘Place of supply’ as the taxable territory wherein the vessels call in, the condition of the place of supply being outside India is not satisfied in the case at hand. Therefore, the proposed supply is not an ‘Export of Service’. Accordingly, the proposed supply is classifiable under SAC 9967 is taxable to GST at 18%.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that works contract service for construction of residential quarters to employees of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP) attracts 18% GST.The Coram of Sri T.G.Venkatesh, I.R.S. and Smt. K. Latha has ruled that “the execution of works contract service for the construction of residential quarters to the employees of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project is note covered under Sl. No. vi of Notification No. 11/2017and the applicable rate is 18% GST”.
The Authority observed that the work entrusted to NPCIL is to implement atomic power projects for the generation of electricity. Thus the works contract service rendered by the applicant in construction of residential quarters fails to satisfy the condition stipulated in Sl. No. vi of Notification No. 11/2017. Thus it is clear that the service rendered by the applicant is not covered under the above said notification.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling has held that sale of coal’ and coal handling and distribution service are not composite supply and attracts 5% and 18% GST respectively. The applicant requires the Authority to clarify whether the both contract can be treated as composite supply and pay GST at 5% or need to treat them separately and collect separate applicable GST rate.
The Coram of Sri T.G.Venkatesh, I.R.S. and Smt. K. Latha observed that the whole supply of coal and the Handling and Transportation services are two supplies rendered at different times. They are two individual supplies which are not rendered in conjunction with each other and have to be treated as independent and separate supplies only. Hence further observed by the Authority that the Supply of coal is liable for 5% GST and the supply of service handling and distribution is liable for 18% GST.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling has held thatRegistration fee, Motor Vehicle Life Tax, RTO charges etc. for getting the vehicle to use on the road, forms part of the taxable supply of leasing services. The applicant M/s Sundaram Finance Ltd. is a non-banking financial company also involved in the business of leasing of machineries, commercial vehicles and non-commercial vehicles.
The Coram of Sri T.G.Venkatesh, I.R.S. and Smt. K. Latha has ruled that“ the portion of the certain additional services such as payment of road tax/registration fees, insurance premium etc. rendered by the applicant in the course of its leasing of the vehicle to the lessee and recovered monthly installments do not fall under the category of service of ‘pure agent’”.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling has held that Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) Medical Oxygen Generation Plant attracts 18% GST. The applicant Freeze Tech Innovations are engaged in the manufacturing of PSA Medical Oxygen generation plant. The applicant approached AAR to know before dealing with its customers, the applicable HNS Code and GST rate on their product.
The Authority observed that the plant which is not in the genre of the appliances used for ozone therapy, oxygen therapy, aerosol therapy, artificial respiration or other therapeutic respiration apparatus include in the CTH 901920. The Authority further observed that the function of the product is generation of Oxygen gas. It works on the principle of Pressure Swing Adsorption, which is being used to separate Oxygen from the Compressed air. The PSA Medical Oxygen Generator supplied by the applicant is an Air Separator and not a therapeutic device and therefore the product is classifiable under CTH 8421.
The Tamil Nadu Authority for Advance Ruling has held that 12% GST Applicable on Solar Pump Controller for Solar Submersible Pump Application. The applicant, Versa Drives Private Limited, have developed a Solar Pump Controller for Solar Submersible Pump Application. The applicant has sought before the authority that the correct HSN Code and the applicable Tax rate in respect of the Versa Vane Solar Pump Controller indigenously designed and manufactured by them.
The Coram of Sri T.G.Venkatesh, I.R.S. and Smt. K. Latha has ruled that “the applicant’s product “Versa Solar Pump Drive” being a convertor is classifiable under CTH 8504, more precisely CTH 8504 4090. The applicable rate of tax on the above said product, when supplied for integration with solar panels and AC submersible pumps is CGST at 6% and SGST at 6%”.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAAR ) has held that strengthening of headquarters building of TANGEDCO is not an activity in relation to generation and distribution of electricity and attracts 18% GST.
The Coram of Sri M. V. Choudary, Member (Centre) and Sri K. Phanindra Reddy, Member (State) has held that “in the case at hand, the condition imposed for availing the concessional rate at the said entry is unambiguous in as much as it says that the services should have been procured by the Government entity, in relation to a work entrusted to it and the strengthening of the Headquarters building of TANGEDCO is definitely not an activity in relation to Generation and Distribution of Electricity, the work entrusted to it. Therefore, the contentions of the appellant in this regard are rejected”.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling( AAAR ) has held that inputs or input services procured for promotional scheme of products is not eligible for Input Tax Credit.
The division bench presided by Sri M. V. Choudary, Member (Centre) and Sri K. Phanindra Reddy, Member (State) has held that “as per the provisions of the CGST Act more precisely section 17(5) of the Act, the gifts or rewards given without consideration even though they were given for sales promotion do not qualify as inputs for the purposes of Credit, since no GST is paid on its disposal. Therefore, we hold that the input tax credit on inputs and input services involved in the goods and services used for the purpose of reward is not available for the appellant and accordingly the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority of Tamil Nadu requires no intervention and the appeal is dismissed”
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has held that the marine engines being used as part of fishing vessels attracts 5% GST.
The Authority observed that the rate is applicable based on the end use of these engines i.e., if they become part of fishing vessels or other vessels including warships and life boats other than rowing boats. Thus the rate of tax at 5% is based on the end use these engines are put to. Hence it becomes imperative that the end use of such engines should be established to avail the reduced rate of GST.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has held that the Cramp Comfort Patch used by women during period pain attracts 12% GST. The applicant M/s. Lagom Labs Private Limited is engaged in the supply of various women’s wellness products such as sanitary pads, value kits which include various products, a multipurpose pouch to fit daily essentials, liners, and ‘Cramp Comfort’ which are heat patches for period pain, under the brand name ‘Nua’.
The Coram of Sri. T.G.Venkatesh, I.R.S., Additional Commissioner/Member, and Smt. K.Latha., M.Sc., (Agri), Joint Commissioner (ST)/ Member by applying the ratio in the judgment issued in the case of Pfizer Consumer Healthcare Vs The Commissioners For HerMajesty S Revenue and Customs, has held that “the product though not notified as a ‘medical device’s required under” Section 3(b)(iv) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940, is still marketed as ‘Self-heating Pain relief Patch’ and can be worn anywhere for alleviating the pain.”
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has held that GST not attracts for warranty services rendered exclusively without combining any other service charges or incidental expenses.
The Coram of Sri. T.G.Venkatesh, I.R.S., Additional Commissioner/Member, and Smt. K.Latha., M.Sc., (Agri), Joint Commissioner (ST)/ Member has held that “As parts are provided to the customer without a consideration under warranty, no GST is chargeable on such replacement. The value of supply made earlier includes the charges to be incurred during the warranty period. Therefore, the replacement of the goods and service rendered during the warranty period without consideration does not attract GST separately.If such cost is incurred by the applicant on behalf of the boat owner and is combined with warranty charges, taxes are applicable. Hence in cases where warranty services are rendered exclusively without combining any other service charges or incidental expenses incurred while rendering the warranty services, only will not attract GST”.
The Tamil Nadu bench of the Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) has held that the membership fee collected by the Rotary club would be subject to GST.
The bench comprising K Latha (Member SGST) and T G Venkatesh (Member, CGST) observed that the membership fees collected by the applicant from their Members is subject to tax as per Section (1) (aa) of the GST Act as the activities rendered by the applicant to their Members is a supply to its constituents/members and they have to be registered. “With respect to the question of whether specific activities listed by them and performed by the applicant are liable to tax, it has been found that the activities so rendered by the applicant are pertaining to the previous years and they have been rendered complete. Hence the question is found to be beyond the scope of Section 95(a) of the Act and is not answered,” the bench said.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) has ruled that GST not payable on Rent for lockers provided in bus stands by a Municipal Corporation.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether the Rent for locker provided in bus stand by the appellant can be covered under Twelfth Schedule to Article 243W of the Constitution.
The coram of M.A.Siddique and M.V.A.Chaudhary has held that to be an activity undertaken by the Municipality as a function entrusted under 243W of the Constitution and the service of rent or fee collection for such a facility is neither a Supply of Goods nor a supply of Service as per Notification No. 14/2017-CT (Rate).The transaction between the corporation and the contractor is an activity/transaction undertaken by the local authority, engaged as public authority. “
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that 18% GST payable on Rodent Feed.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether the product Rodent Feed can be classified under the HSN 2309 90 10 or not. If No, HSN applicable for the specified product. As HSN 2309 is exempt under the Serial Number 102 of Notification no. 02/2017, whether the product Rodent Feed which falls under the same group is also exempt, if not the taxability of the same.
The coram of S.V.KasiVisveshavar Rao and B.Ragu Kiran held that product Rodent Feed can be classified under the HSN 2309 90 10 but cannot be covered under the exemption notification. The AAR further ruled that description to Sl.No.102 does not include rodent feed and hence taxable under Sl.No.453 of Schedule III of Notification No. 01/2017 dated: 28.06.2017 at the rate of 9% CGST & SGST each.
In Re: M/s INOX Air Products Pvt Ltd. CITATION: 2022 TAXSCAN (AAAR) 116
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) while upholding the AAR’s Order held that INOX cannot utilise ITC of GST restricted under Section 17(5)(d) Charged by IPL.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue Whether INOX would be entitled to avail and utilize ITC of GST Charged by IPL if such transaction is considered to be a supply.
The AAR ruled that the applicant is not entitled to avail and utilize ITC of GST charged by IPL as the same is restricted under Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST/TNGST Act 2017, if such transaction is considered to be a supply.The coram of M.S.Sidhiqui and M.V.S.Choudhary held thatthe services received from IPL, the cost of which is capitalised along with ASP, is a service received ‘for construction’ of an immovable property, and therefore the taxes paid is restricted as per Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST/TNGST Act 2017 and we uphold the ruling of the Lower Authority.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) held that no GST on services rendered towards handling of Dhothies& Sarees, School Uniforms from Co-operative Societies to Public Distribution System.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue of whether the claim of expenses incurred to handle the Cost Free Distribution Sarees &Dhothies and Cost-Free School Uniform Scheme and supply to Revenue Department/Social Welfare Department will attract 18% GST or not.
The coram of K.Latha and T.G.Venkatesh held that the services rendered by the applicant towards handling of Dhothies& Sarees/ School Uniforms from Co-operative Societies to Public Distribution System / Revenue Department are exempted from payment of GST as per serial number 3 of the table given in GST Notification No. 12/ 2017 – Central Tax (Rate) Dated: 28.06.2017 as amended read with SI. No. 3 of Annexure to notification Ms. No. 72/2017 dated 29.06.2017
In Re: M/s George Maijo Industries Private LimitedCITATION: 2022 TAXSCAN (AAR) 149
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) held that 5% GST on marine engines and spare parts.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue Applicability of GST rate on marine engines pertaining to HS code 8407 and its spare parts without considering its general tax rate as per the entry of Schedule I, Sl.No.252 of GST Act dated 28.06.2017, being this engine forms a part of a fishing vessel of HS code 8902 and Applicability of GST rate 5% on marine engines pertaining to HS code 8407 and its spare parts without considering its general tax rate as per the entry of Schedule I, Sl.No.252 of GST Act dated 28.06.2017, being this engine forms a part of boats of HS code 8906 being supplied to defence department and other agencies used for patrolling/flood relief and rescue purposes.
The coram of K.Latha and T.G.Venkatesh ruled that applicability of GST Rate 5% on marine engines pertaining to HS code 8407 forming part of fishing vessels is not answered for lack of substantiating documents.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the 12% GST payable on supply of Stator Coil for use in wind operated electricity generators (WOEG).The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether the supply of Stator Coil by the Applicant to M/s. Coral Manufacturing Works India Private Ltd., will be eligible for the levy of 2.5% CGST in terms of Sl. No. 234 in the notification 1-CTR dated 28 June 2017 and 2.5% SGST in terms of the corresponding SGST notification.
The coram of L.Latha and T.V.Venkatesh ruled that the supply of Stator Coil by the Applicant to M/s. Coral Manufacturing Works India private Limited for use in the WOEG will be eligible for the levy of 6% CGST in terms of Sl.No.201 A in the Schedule II in the notification 1 CTR dated 28 June 2017 (as amended) and 6% SGST in terms of corresponding SGST notification with effect from October 1, 2021, subject to the self-assessment of the applicant that all such supplics are for the manufacture of the Generators for Renewable Energy, based on the Purchase Orders or Supply Contracts for each of such supply.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that no Input Tax Credit (ITC) available on GST paid on the Motor cars of seating capacity not exceeding 13 (including Driver) leased or rented with Operators to Vendors.
The coram of L.Latha and T.V.Venkatesh ruled that GST paid on the Motor cars of seating capacity not exceeding 13 (including Driver) leased or rented with Operators to the Vendors is not available to the applicant as ITC in terms of Section 17(5)(a)(A) of Central Goods and Service Tax Act. “GST paid on the Motor cars of seating capacity not exceeding 13 (including Driver) registered as a public vehicle with RTO to transport passengers, provided to their different customers on lease or rental or hire will NOT be available to as ITC,” the AAR said.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that no GST concessional rates are applicable to activities of manufacture, supply of Fortified Rice Kernels till September 30, 2021.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue of Whether Notification No.39/2017 CT(R) dated 18.10.2017 read with G.O.Ms.No. 140 dated 17.10.2017 issued by the Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, would be applicable to the Applicant’s activity of manufacture and supply of Fortified Rice Kernels to the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation pursuant to the Pilot Scheme on “Fortification of Rice & its Distribution under the Public Distribution System” project launched by the Central Government.
The coram of Members K.Latha and T.V.Venkatesh held thatthe concessional rate under Notification No.39/2017 C.T. (Rate) for the Period 18.10.2017 to 30.09.2021 is not available to the applicant for reasons, that FRK is not a food preparation put up in unit containers for free distribution to economically weaker sections and Applicants are not involved in free distribution of FRK to Economically weaker sections.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the no Input Tax Credit (ITC) is available to manufacturers who purchased Dubai tickets, gold vouchers, home appliances for rewarding retailers who meet targets.The issue raised was whether the GST paid on inputs/input services procured by the applicant to implement the promotional scheme under the name ‘Buy n Fly’ is eligible for Input Tax Credit under the GST law in terms of Section 16 read with Section 17 of the CGST Act, 2017 and TNGST Act, 2017.
The coram of L.Latha and T.G.Venkatesh ruled that the promotional rewards were extended by the applicant at their own will voluntarily without any consideration in money or money’s worth on achievement of a set target to the retailers. The rewards are not in the nature of discounts to the products but are in the nature of personal consumables and qualify to be termed as gifts.The AAR clarified that the tax paid on the goods/services procured for distribution as rewards extended by the applicant in the ‘Buy n Fly’ scheme is not available to them as ITC in as much as such rewards have been extended as gifts.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that 18% GST payable on Children Scooter, Activity Ride-on, Smart Tri-cycle and Kick Scooter.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue when Physical force is the primary action of a toy and if the light and the music are ancillary to it then whether it is to be classified under “Electronic Toys” or “other than Electronic Toys”.
The coram of L.Latha and T.G.Venkatesh ruled that Children Scooter, Activity Ride-on, Smart Tri-cycle and Kick Scooter, in which physical force is the primary action and contains an in built electronic circuit, are ‘Electronic Toys’ and the applicable GST Rate is CGST @ 9% as per Sl.No. 440 of Schedule-III of Notification No. 01/2017 C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and SGST 9% as per Sl.No. 440 of Schedule III to Notification No. II(2)/CTR/532(d-4/2017 vide G.O. (Ms) No. 62 dated 29.06.2017.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the Input Tax Credit (ITC) cannot be claimed on GST paid on inputs services procured to implement promotional schemes under ‘Buy n Fly’.
The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether the GST paid on inputs/input services procured by the applicant to implement the promotional scheme under the name Buy n Fly is eligible for Input Tax Credit under the GST law in terms of Section 16 read with Section 17 of the CGST Act, 2017 and TNGST Act, 2017. The coram of L.Latha and T.G.Venkatesh ruled that the GST paid on inputs/input services procured by the applicant to implement the promotional scheme under the name Buy n Fly is not eligible for Input Tax Credit under the GST law in terms of Section 17(5)(g) and (b) of the CGST Act, 2017 and TNGST Act, 2017
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the value of construction in respect of Apartments shall be deemed to be equal to the Total amount charged for similar apartments in the project from the independent buyers.
The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether paragraph 2A of Notification No. 03/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 29th March, 2019, is applicable to those agreements entered on or before 29th September 2019 with unregistered persons.The coram of Tmt. T.Padmavathi and B. Senthilvelavan observed that the date of levy being the date of issuance of completion certificate, Para 2A becomes applicable to them and so the value should be calculated only as prescribed in the said para.“It is clear that Para 2A of the Notification no. 3/2019 is applicable to the transaction between the applicant and the owners of the land and the valuation shall be done as stipulated therein,” the AAR ruled.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that no GST is payable Tender for housekeeping, Security Services, Assistance in Electrical, Plumbing, Laundering, Cooking, Catering, Gardening, Carpentry Services in Government Hospitals.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether services provided by Padmavathi Hospitality & Facilities Management Services (PHFMS) to DME are classifiable as a function entrusted to a Panchayat or a Municipality under the constitution? If not then can we conclude that no exemption is available to PHFMS.
The coram of Tmt Padmavathi. T and Senthilvelavan ruled that the proposed supply as per the Tender for housekeeping, Security Services and Assistance in Electrical, Plumbing, laundering, Cooking, Catering, Gardening & Carpentry Services in 93 Government Hospitals under the Control of Directorate of Medical & Rural Health Services, 86 Institutions, Directorate Medical & Rural Health Services (ESI)-7 Institutions is exempt under Entry No.3 of Notification No.1212017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 read with trntry No. 3 of Notification dated 29.06.2017.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that no Goods and Service Tax (GST) is applicable on Vocational Training Courses by Leprosy Mission Trust India.The applicant sought the advance ruling on the issue whether services provided under vocational training courses recognized by National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) or State Council of Vocational Training (SCVT) is exempt either under Entry No. 64 of exemption list of Goods and Service Tax Act 20l7 or under Educational Institution defined under Notification 12/2017 Central Tax (Rate).
The coram of Smt. T. Padmavathi and B. Senthilvelavan ruled that the services provided by the Leprosy Mission Trust India, Regional Industrial Training Institute, Vadathorasalur under Vocational Training Courses pertaining to Mechanic (Motor Vehicle), Electrician, Sewing Technology recognized by National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) are exempt under Serial Number 66 of Notification I2/2017 Central Tax (Rate) as education as part of an approved vocational education course.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that Activity of Bus Body Building undertaken on the chassis supplied by the customers is a ‘Supply’ and it attracts 18% GST.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issues Whether the activity of Bus Body Building on the chassis supplied by the customer on job work basis is a supply of service or supply of goods and if it is supply of Service, what is the applicable rate of GST and its SAC code.
The coram of members T.Padmavathi and B.Senthilvelan ruled that the bus body fabricated and mounted on the chassis supplied by the customer is delivered back to the customer charging a lump sum amount as job work charges. It is to be noted that ownership of the chassis remains with their customers and will not be transferred to the applicant at any point of time. The consideration is received only towards fabrication services besides own materials involved in the fabrication. In view of the above discussion it is evident that the activity undertaken by the applicant for Bus Body Building on the chassis supplied by the customer is to be classified as Job Work as per Schedule II of the CGST Act 2017, the said activity of bus body building on the chassis supplied by the customer by the applicant is supply of services.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the INOX is not entitled to utilise Input Tax Credit (ITC) of GST restricted under Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act which is charged by IPL.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether the applicant is eligible to avail Input Tax Credit of GST Paid on the supply received by them. The question raised is within the ambit of this authority as per Section 95/97(2) of GST Act and therefore the application is admitted.
The coram of members T.Padmavathi and B.Senthilvelan noted that the applicant is a registered person and therefore is entitled to avail credit of the supplies received by them in the course or furtherance of business as per Section 16(1) of the Act. The applicant has stated that as the ‘Air Separation Unit(ASU)’ which is put up on the land leased is a ‘Plant and Machinery’, the restriction at Section 17(5)(d) is not applicable in respect of the goods and services used for the construction of such Plant and Machinery. “The applicant is not entitled to avail and utilize ITC of GST charged by IPL as the same is restricted under Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST/TNGST Act 2017, if such transaction is considered to be a supply,” the AAR observed.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that GST is applicable on Components, supplied in Sale-in-Transit transaction, without payment of tax under erstwhile CST regime.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue Whether the Components, which were supplied in Sale-in-Transit transaction, without payment of tax under the erstwhile Central Sales Tax regime, by the Applicant, i.e.AHPL to its Customer (TANGEDCO) in Tamil Nadu, will attract levy of Goods and Services Tax.
The coram of members T.Padmavathi and B.Senthilvelan held that the Components, which were supplied in Sale-in-Transit transaction, without payment of tax under the erstwhile Central Sales Tax regime, by the Applicant , i.e. AHPL to its Customer (TANGEDCO) in Tamil Nadu is a `Supply’ as per Section 7 of the CGST/TNGST Act 2017 and will attract levy of Goods and Services Tax.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that 18% GST payable on transfer of leasehold rights.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether GST is payable on the transfer of leasehold rights in respect of the consideration of Rs. 15 Crores received by them from M/s. INOX Air products Private Limited for the land allotted by SIPCOT and whether the Subsequent transfer of SIPCOTs allotted land from the Applicant to M/s. Inox Air Products Private Limited would fall within the ambit of `Supply’ as defined under Section 7 of the Goods and Services Act 2017.
The coram of members T.Padmavathi and B.Senthilvelan noted that the activity undertaken by IPL in agreeing to part with the interests of the leasehold rights in the land required by INOX for furtherance of their business, against a consideration is an activity of ‘agreeing to do an act’, which is a taxable service classifiable under ‘Other Miscellaneous Services’, with SAC 9997. “The activity of agreeing to partwith the leasehold interests held by the applicant in favour of M/s. INOX Air Products Private Limited is ‘Supply’ as defined under Section 7 of the Goods and Services Act 2017 and GST is liable to be paid on the consideration of Rs. 15 Crores received by them,” the AAR ruled.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) while upholding the AAR’s Ruling ruled that Letting out of Compressors for Pumping of Water from Borewells to Agricultural field is not ‘Support Service for Agriculture.The appellant has sought the advance ruling whether the following supply of services provided by the applicant are in relation to agricultural operations directly in connection with raising of agricultural produce namely, drilling of Borewells for supply of water for agricultural operations like cultivation including seeding, planting and ploughing and letting out of compressors for pumping of water from the borewells to the agricultural fields.
The AAR ruled that drilling of Borewells for supply of water in agricultural land is not ‘Support Service for agriculture classifiable under ‘SAC 9986’. The two members consisting of M.A.Siddique and G.V.Krishna Rao said “we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Advance Ruling Authority in this matter.”
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that ready-to-use powder mixes to attract 18% of Goods and Service Tax.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue of clarification on the rate of GST for their products listed in the application and the applicable HSN code. The Coram of KurinjiSelvaan V.S. and Senthil Velavan B. ruled that Branded mixes for dosa, idli, tiffin, health, and porridge will yield a Goods & Services Tax (GST) of 18 percent.
The AAR said the products in question are all powdered food preparations. “The dosai mixes and idli mixes are packaged and sold as mixes to be mixed with water/boiled water/curd to make it as batter and the product sold is a powder and not a batter,” it said while making it clear that it will attract GST at a rate of 18 percent and not 5 percent.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that 18% GST payable on De-mineralized water for Industrial use.The applicant sought the advance ruling on the issue of Whether the classification of the supply of outputs as the sale of goods is correct; whether the classification of water sold as Water (other than aerated, mineral, purified, distilled, medicinal, ionic, battery, de-mineralized, and water sold in a sealed container) under Heading 2201 is correct; whether the classification of effluent purchased from dyeing as other wastes from chemical or allied industries (3825 69 00) is correct.
The coram of KurinjiSelvaan V.S. and Senthil Velavan B. ruled that in the proposed Modus of purchase of ‘Raw effluent’, treat it on own account and supply the outputs at market rates, the classification of supply of outputs as sale of goods is correct. The classification of Water recovered, which is demineralized water for Industrial use is classifiable under CTH 2201 as Waters described under S.no.24 of Annexure -III of Notification No. 01/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) ruled that no GST payable on the Supply of non-purified water. The Appellant, New Tirupur Area Development Corporation Limited is in the business of promoting infrastructure development activities in the area of water supply at New Tirupur.The main question raised by the appellant and also the point of reference made by the members of AAR is whether the water supplied by the appellant is exempted under SI. No. 99 of Notification No. 2/2017-CT(R) and its equivalent SGST notification published vide TamilNadu GO Ms. No. 63 dated 29/6/2017.
The two members consisting of M.A. Siddique and G.V. Krishna Rao held that the meaning of ‘purified water’ depends on what use of it people have in mind, like whether it is for washing, pharma use, industrial use or even to swim. In chemical terms, purified water is pure H2O and only contains Hydrogen and Oxygen and no minerals. Distilled water is the most common form of pure water. However, potable water has only one meaning, water fit for human and animal consumption and has dissolved minerals.Therefore, it can be safely concluded that the supply of the appellant is of raw water, treated to become ‘potable water’ and nothing more. Once it is distinctly clear that the supply is of ‘water’ only, and not purified water, the same falling under entry 99 of Notification No. 2/2017-CT (R) is qualified for the exemption.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that Input Tax Credit (ITC) eligible on input services used in installation of Solar Power Panel.The applicant has sought the advance ruling on the issue whether the company is eligible to take input tax credit as inputs/capital goods or input services of the items used in Design, Engineering, Supply, Execution (EPC) of 265KW Rooftop Grid Solar PV Power Plant as per MNRE & IEC Standards Yet another issue raised was whether the company is eligible to take input tax credit for inputs and services for running the solar plant.
The two-member bench of KurinjiSelvaan and B. Senthilvelvar ruled that the applicant is eligible for availing input tax credit as inputs/capital goods or input services of the items used in Design, Engineering, Supply, Execution (EPC) of 265KW Rooftop Grid Solar PV Power Plant as per MNRE & IEC Standards procured from M.s KCP Solar Industries as they have been found to comply with the provisions of Sections 16(1) and (2), 17(5) of the CGST Act,2017 and that they are found to be using the electricity so generated captively only in the process of manufacture of edible oils, which is a taxable commodity. “In respect of eligibility to credit of goods/services utilised in running the plant, no ruling is pronounced as the details of such input goods/ services which are proposed to be or used in running the plant have not been furnished before us,” the AAR said.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) was required to discharge Liability on a reverse charge basis on the supply of Legal services.The applicant sought the advance ruling on the issue of whether the Indian Institute of Management, Tiruchirapalli, Tiruchirappalli(llM) is a Government Entity under GST Law.
The Coram of KurinjiSelvaan V.S. and Senthil Velavan B. ruled that the Indian Institute of Management, Tiruchirappalli (IIM) is a Government Entity Under GST Law. The applicant is liable to deduct tax at source (TDS) under Section 51 of the CGST Act, 20I7 read, with Notification No. 50/2018-C.T dated September 13, 2018. “The applicant is required to discharge Liability on reverse charge basis on supply of services as per Section 9(3) of the CGST Act, 20I7, in respect of Legal services received by them for which documentary evidence was submitted,” the AAR said.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) ruled that 12% GST payable on Britannia Winkin’ Cow Thick Shake’.The appellant sought the advance ruling on the issue whether UHT Sterilized Flavoured Milk is classifiable under Chapter 4 (Tariff Heading 0402 which covers ‘Milk… containing added sugar or other sweetening matter…’ or alternatively, Tariff Heading 0404 which covers ‘Other’, i.e. ‘products consisting of natural milk constituents, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter, not elsewhere specified or included’).
The two members consisting of M.A.Siddique and G.V.Krishna Rao held that UHT Sterilized Flavoured Milk marketed under the brand name ‘Britannia Winkin’ Cow Thick Shake’ by the appellant is not classifiable under the Tariff heading ‘0402 /0404″ but classifiable under CTH 22029930 as held by the Lower Authority. The subject appeal is disposed of accordingly.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) ruled that the Drilling of Borewells for the Supply of Water in Agriculture Land is not a ‘Support Service for Agriculture’.The appellant sought the advance ruling on the issue of whether the supply of service provided by the appellant is in relation to agricultural operations directly in connection with raising of agricultural produce Drilling of Borewells for the supply of water for agricultural operations like cultivation including seeding, planting and ploughing, and letting out compressors for pumping of water from the borewells to the agricultural fields.
The AAR ruled that a compressor is not agricultural machinery and is a General-Purpose Machinery. Also, the only provision of agricultural machinery with crew and operators is stated as ‘Support service for agriculture. Therefore, letting out of the same is also not a ‘Support service for agriculture’ classifiable under SAC 9986 and the applicant is not eligible for exemption.The two members consisting of M.A. Siddique and G.V. Krishna Rao said “we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Advance Ruling Authority in this matter.”
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) ruled that 28% GST payable on Motor Car Air Springs (shock absorber).The appellant has sought advance ruling on the issue of whether “Air Springs” manufactured and supplied by the appellant will be correctly classifiable under Tariff heading 40169990 as opposed to Tariff heading 8708 9900 and attract GST at the rate of 18%.
The appellant has claimed that the HSN Explanatory Notes to Section XVII specifically excludes ‘Springs’ from the scope of ‘Parts and Accessories’ under CTH 8708. The relevant note seeks to exclude ‘Parts of General use- springs (including leaf springs for vehicles) such goods of base metal fall in Chapter 73 to 76 and 78 to 81, and similar goods of Plastics fall in Chapter 39″.The two members consisting of M.A. Siddique and G.V. Krishna Rao while upholding the ruling of AAR ruled that Air Springs manufactured by the appellant is classifiable under CTH 8708 as rightly held by the Lower Authority.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that 28% GST applicable on ‘Track assembly’, which is an accessory to Motor vehicles.The applicant has sought the Advance Ruling in respect of the correct classification of goods manufactured by the applicant viz. “Automotive Seating System” and Will the goods manufactured fall under CH 87089900 attracting GST 28% or under CH 940199990 attracting GST 18%.
The Coram of Kurinji Selvan V.S. and Senthil Velavan B observed that the product ‘Track Assembly’ manufactured and supplied by M/s. Daebu Automotive India Private Limited is classifiable under CTH 8708 of the First Schedule to theCustoms Tariff Act, 1975 as applicable to GST as per Explanation (iii) to Notification 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dt 28.06.2017 and G.O. Ms No. 59, Commercial Taxes and Registration (B1) dt 29th June 2017. The AAR ruled that The applicable rate of tax is 14% CGST as per entry Sl.No.170 of Schedule -IV of the Notification 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dt 28.06.2017 as amended and 14% SGST as per entry sl. No. 170 of Schedule-IV of Notification No. II(2)/CTR/532(d-4)/2017 vide G.O. (Ms) No. 62 dated 29.06.2017 as amended.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the GST is exempted on renting of Immovable Property by Municipal Corporation to another State Government/ Central Government/ Union Territory or Local Authority.The applicant has sought the advanced ruling on various issues in respect of Fee from Parking, Market fee daily, Market fee weekly, fee for bays in bus-stand, slaughter-house fee, municipal lodge, fee on pay and use toilets and for entry vehicle in the market as to whether the services rendered by them directly are covered under Twelfth Schedule to Article 243 W of the Constitution and /or exempted under the Notification.
The Coram of Kurinji Selvan V.S. and B. Senthilvelavan ruled that the applicant supplies the ‘Right to collect the fees/right to certain amenities” to the contractors and the supply undertaken by the contractors are as per the tender conditions which is an independent supply. The applicability of the Notification to the supplies of the contractors is not answered as per Section 95(a) read with Section 103(1) of the GST Act.The AAR further ruled that Service of renting of immovable property by the applicant to another Central/State government/Union territory or Local authority alone is exempted from tax as per Sl. No. 8 of Notification 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017 and the services of renting of immovable property to other than Central/State Government, Union Territory or Local authority, are not exempted under S.No. 8 of the table to Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the GST is applicable on Credit card expenses incurred by employees of an Indian subsidiary.The appellant sought the advance ruling on the issue of whether GST is leviable on the reimbursement of expenses from the subsidiary company to its ultimate Holding company located in a foreign territory outside India.
The AAR ruled that the applicant is liable to pay IGST on the ‘Wellsone Commercial Card’ expenses paid by the applicant to its Ultimate Holding company, ICU Medicals Inc. having its place of business in the USA under Reverse Charge basis. The AAR further held that the applicant is liable to pay IGST under Reverse Charge, the applicable rate of IGST is 18%. The coram of M.A. Siddiqui and G.V. Krishna Rao held that Credit card expenses incurred by employees of an Indian subsidiary are set to come under the Goods and Services Tax. The AAAR ordered the levy of GST on reimbursement of expenses to the Holding Company. The payment on behalf of the subsidiary company amounts to advance consideration towards services provided by the subsidiary company.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that 18% GST is applicable on services provided to Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution Company Ltd. (TANGEDCO) for carrying out retrofitting work for strengthening NPKRR Maaligai against seismic and wind effects.
The applicant has sought the advance ruling in respect of the GST to be charged on providing works contract services to TANGEDCO for carrying out retrofitting work for strengthening the NPKRR Maaligai against seismic and wind effect and modification of elevation in TNEB headquarters building at Chennai. The coram of Kurinji Selvan and B. Sethilvelavan ruled that The rate of GST to be charged on the services provided by the applicant to TANGEDCO for carrying out retrofitting work for strengthening the NPKRR Maaligai against seismic and wind effect and modification of elevation in TNEB headquarters building at Chennai is 18% (9%CGST and 9% SGST) as per SL.No.3(xii) of Notification dated June 28, 2017, as amended.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) ruled that Waste Collection, Segregation, Treatment, transportation, Disposal Services under Service Agreements not exempted from GST.The appellant sought the advance ruling on the issue in respect of the Classification·of services and whether the activity of waste collection, segregation, treatment, transportation and disposal services carried out by the Applicant under the Service Agreements entered with both concessionaires is exempted from Goods and Services Tax in terms of entry no.3 of the Notification 12/ 2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017.
The AAR ruled that the supply of services by the applicant relating to waste collection, segregation, treatment, transportation and disposal services under the Service Agreements entered with both concessionaires are classified under SAC 9994 in terms of Notification No. 11/ 2017 C.T. (Rate) dated June 28, 2017.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) directed the appellant to file fresh application before AAR as the question raised is no more pending before High Court.The appellant, sought the advanced ruling on the issue whether services provided by Padmavathi Hospitality & Facilities Management Services (PHFMS) to DME are classifiable as a function entrusted to a Panchayat or a Municipality under the constitution. If not then can we conclude that no exemption is available to PHFMS.
The AAAR consisting of M.A.Siddiqui and G.V.Krishna Rao held that The Order of the Advance Ruling Authority was right, since at the material time there was a petition filed by the appellant, pending before the Hon’ble High Court in this matter. Therefore, there is no need to interfere with the order of the AAR; however, the appellant is free to file a fresh application before the AAR, if he wishes to do so, since there is no pending proceedings at the High Court.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled thatNo GST Exemption on Operation and Maintenance of High Quality Treated Drinking Water Plant for the “Amma Kudineer Project.The applicant has sought the advanced ruling on the issue whether the Services provided by the applicant to the recipient i.e. The Greater Chennai Corporation is a pure service provided to the local authority by way of activity in relation to functions entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G and Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution and eligible for benefit of exemption provided under Serial No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017.
The coram of Kurinji Selvan and B. Sethilvelavan ruled that the Supply provided by the applicant to the recipient i.e. The Greater Chennai Corporation based on the agreement to provide RO Plant and undertake O&M of the same, being not a “Pure service” but a composite supply of goods & Services, they are not eligible for benefit of exemption provided at Serial No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) ruled that GST leviable on reimbursement amount, being advance payment made by holding company towards the cost incurred for the provision of Software Services.The appellant sought the advance ruling on the issue of whether GST is leviable on the reimbursement of expenses from the subsidiary company to its ultimate Holding company located in a foreign territory outside India.
The coram of M.A. Siddiqui and G.V. Krishna Rao held that the Ruling pronounced by the Advance Ruling Authority is modified to the extent that GST is leviable on the reimbursement amount, being advance payment made by the holding company towards the cost incurred for the provision of Software Services supplied by the appellant, as per the Time of Supply provided under Section 13 of the CGST/TNGST Act 2017 and the applicable rate is that applicable to the supply of Software Services made by them.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
