This round-up analytically summarises the key stories related to the Goods and Services Tax Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ) and Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAAR ) reported at Taxscan.in during the period from May 3, 2024 to May 24, 2024.
The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has determined that a GST of 18% must be paid on the sum received by the applicant from Mercedes-Benz India as reimbursement for the âLoss on Sale of Demo Car.â It was noted that the funds received from Mercedes-Benz India as reimbursement for the âLoss on Sale of Demo Carâ should be considered as payment received for providing services related to âagreeing to tolerate an act.â
The Authority Bench of Tanisha Dutta and Joyjit Banik concluded that the applicant can indeed claim input tax credit on cars used for demonstration purposes and subsequently sold after a specified period.
The Odisha Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ) ruled that sale of land and duplex construction on same land executing two separate agreements attracts an effective rate of 5% Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) after deducting 1/3 towards land cost from the total consideration.
The Applicant sought clarification on the GST rate for the sale of land and construction of duplexes under separate agreements, and the admissibility of input tax credit.
The bench of Abhay Gupta and P K Mohanty ruled that âin view of Notification No. 03/2019-C.T. (Rate) dated 29.03.2019, the Applicant is liable to pay GST @7.5% (CGST @3.75% + SGST @3.75%) after deducting l/3rd towards land cost from the total consideration i.e. effective rate of 5% GST on the full consideration received towards land and Duplex and is not eligible for ITC on any inward supply of goods and services.â Thus, the applicant is liable to pay an effective rate of 5% GST.
The Mumbai bench of the Customs Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the PVC raincoats are classifiable under the category of âOvercoats, Raincoats, and Similar Articlesâ as specified in the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
The bench found that the goods included the submissions made by the applicant during the course of personal hearing. I therefore proceed to decide the present applications regarding classification of âPVC raincoatsâ on the basis of the information on record as well as the existing legal framework having bearing on the classification of the products in question under the first schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
Heading 6201 covers Menâs or boysâ overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks, anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, wind-jackets and similar articles, other than those of heading 6203. Heading 6203 covers Menâs or boysâ suits, ensembles, jackets, blazers, trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts (other than swimwear). Plain reading of these two headings makes it clear that heading 6201 is the most suitable heading to cover raincoat, moreover, CTI 6201 4010 specifically coversâ Overcoats, raincoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks and similar articles (of man-made fibers) On the basis of foregoing discussions and findings, the single member bench of the tribunal comprising V.M Shobhan Sindhu (Asst. Commissioner of Customs and Secretary Customs Authority for Advance Ruling) ruled that the subject âPVC raincoatsâ merit classification under CTH 6201 and more specifically under CTI 6201 4010 of the first schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975
The Gujarat bench of the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR), ruled that there was no Goods and Service Tax applicable on the supply of imported goods on a high seas sale basis, as it falls under Entry 8(b) of Schedule III of the Central Goods and Service Tax CGST Act, 2017.
The two member bench comprising Riddesh Raval (Member SGST) and Amit Kumar Mishra (Member CGST) concluded that the transaction of sale of goods on high seas sale [HSS] basis by the applicant to IOCL in terms of Contract No. 44AC91 00-EPCC- I as has been held supra, is covered under entry 8(b) of Schedule III of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore the HSS supply was neither a supply of goods nor a spply of services.
The Gujarat bench of the Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ), ruled that restaurant service supplies are exclusively not eligible for Input Tax Credit ( ITC ), while other supplies remain exempted.
The bench found that the first question on which ruling is sought is whether they are entitled to claim ITC of the expenses incurred for the general expenses of the Company which are meant for the purpose of business. Further found that explanation (iv) reproduced supra would come to play meaning thereby that credit of input tax charged on goods or services used exclusively in supplying restaurant service is not eligible.
The Gujarat bench of the Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ) ruled that the employer was eligible to avail Input Tax Credit ( ITC ) on the rooftop solar system, along with its installation and commissioning, under Section 17(5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax ( CGST ) Act.
The bench stated that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the GGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under the GGST Act.
The two member bench of the tribunal comprising Riddesh Raval (member SGST) and Amit Kumar Mishra (member CGST) concluded that applicant was eligible to avail ITC on roof top solar system with installation & commissioning under the CGST/GGST Act. The roof top solar system with installation and commissioning constitute plant and machinery of the applicant and hence is not blocked ITC under Section 17 (5) of the CGST/GGST Act.
The Gujarat bench of the Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ) ruled that deducting from employee salaries for food provided within factory premises does not fall under the classification of âsupplyâ as per section 7 of the (Central Goods and Service Tax) CGST Act.
The two member bench of the tribunal comprising Riddesh Raval (SGST member) and Amit Kumar Mishra (CGST member) ruled that deduction of amount by the applicant f-rom the salary of the employees who are availing facility of food provided in the factory premises would not be considered as a âsupplyâ under the provisions section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the GGST Act, 2017.
The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has held that the supply of disposable paper cups attracts 18% GST. It was observed that manufactured disposable paper cups are covered under HSN 4823-4000.
The two-member bench of Tanisha Dutta and Joyjit Banik observed that it is covered under the description falling under Chapter, Heading, Sub-heading, or Tariff Item 4823, as specified in entry serial number 157 of Schedule-III of Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017 (as amended). The AAR held that the supply of disposable paper cups as manufactured by the applicant is covered under HSN 4823-4000 and would attract 18% GST.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
