This weekly round-up analytically summarizes the key stories related to Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) reported at Taxscan.in during the previous week from October 18 to October 23, 2021.
Bhagyalakhsmi Devamma Vangimallu
The Telangana Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that GST is exigible on EPF, ESI, Salary, or Wages reimbursed by Hospital. The coram of Members, S.V.Kasi Visveshwara Rao and B.Raghu Kiran ruled that the applicant is not a pure agent under GST Law. Further, the deductions available under Section 15 of the CGST Act do not include the amounts pertaining to EPF, ESI, Salary, or Wages. Therefore the entire amount received from the Hospital is exigible to CGST / SGST Act 2017.
M/s. Continental Engineering Corporation
The Telangana Authority of Advance ruling (AAR) ruled that GST payable on Amount received by Arbitration for works executed in pre-GST period. The coram of Members, S.V.Kasi Visveshwara Rao and B.Raghu Kiran ruled that the liability to tax under CGST/SGST Acts for works contracts is determined by the time of supply of services in Section 13 read with Section 31 i.e., the provisions pertaining to tax invoice. The time of supply of service according to Section 13(2) is the earliest of the date on which invoice is issued or date of provision of service or date of receipt of payment or date on which the recipient shows the receipt of services in his books. As seen from the averments of the applicant the supply was made prior to introduction of GST. Therefore it is not covered by Section 13(2) of the CGST/SGST Acts. Hence the amounts claimed pertaining to the works executed earlier to introduction of GST are not taxable under CGST/SGST Acts.
Honer Developer Private Limited
The Telangana Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that dwelling units falling under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) scheme attract Concessional GST rate. The coram of Members, S.V.Kasi Visveshwara Rao and B.Raghu Kiran noted that Government of India in Notification No. 01/2018 dated 25.01.2018 has inserted the entry in Notification No. 11/2017 dated: 28.06.2017 against Serial No. 3, in column (3), in item (4) at sub item (db) which reads, “a civil structure or any other original works pertaining to the houses constructed or acquired under the Credit Linked Subsidy Scheme for Economically Weaker Section (EWS)/ Lower Income Group (LIG)/ Middle Income Group-1 (MlG-1)/ Middle Income Group-2 (MlG-2) under the Housing for All (Urban) Mission/ Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (Urban).”
The Maharashtra Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) while rejecting the application filed by the USV Private Limited held that the only goods supplier can seek GST advance ruling, not the recipient. The coram of Rajiv Magoo and T.R.Ramnani conducted that the subject application is rejected as being non-maintainable as per Section 95 of the CGST Act, 2017 because the applicant has firstly raised questions as a recipient of services and secondly the questions are in respect of past and completed supply as on the date of the application and not supply, which is being undertaken/proposed to be undertaken.
M/s. TIF Integrated Industrial Parks Pvt. Ltd.
The Telangana Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that the GST is payable on land after developing by erecting civil structures or Buildings or Complexes. The coram of B. Raghu Kiran, IRS, Additional Commissioner (Central Tax) and S.V. Kasi Visweswar Rao, Additional Commissioner (State Tax) ruled that if the applicant sells the land after developing by way of erecting a civil structure or a building or a complex then such supply is liable to tax under CGST/SGST Acts. However, if the land is sold without any development involving any civil structure or building or complex such supply falls under paragraph 5 of Schedule III to Section 7(2) of CGST Act, 2017 and hence is exempt from tax.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
