We uphold the decision of the Authority for Advance Ruling of Tamil Nadu, vide AAR Order No.33/AAR/2022 dated:31.08.2022 and reject the subject appeal.
Whether the appellant having undertaken the construction of their new administrative office will be eligible for the ITC of following 1 Central Air conditioning Plant 2 Lift 3 Electrical fittings not for civil construction 4 Solar Plant 5 Fire Safety Extinguishers 6 Architect Service Fees 7 Interior Designing Fees
Whether the inputs and input services procured by the appellant, in order to undertake the mandatory CSR activities as required under the Companies Act, 2013, qualify as being in the course and furtherance of business and therefore will be counted as eligible ITC in terms of Section 16 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act)?
We affirm the Ruling UP ADRG-22/2023 dated 21-04-2023 passed by the Authority for Advance Ruling Against the appellant.
We confirm the impugned Ruling UP ADRG-23/2023 dated 21-04-2023 passed by the Authority for Advance Ruling against the Appellant except the provission of GST invoice as held in Para 19 of the Ruling.
We modify the impugned ruling classyfing the product of the appellant under Ch-2401 of GST Tariff subject to the process adopted by the appellant as provided under Explanatory Note to Ch-2401
Advance Ruling No. and Date : 22/WBAAR/2022-23 dated 09.02.2023
Questions before the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling [‘WBAAR’], Goods and Service Tax and answers are:
(i) Whether the Constitution of India has conferred any power onto the Parliament to legislate on sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption with reference to the Goods and Service tax regime, considering the provision of Article 246A read with Article 366(12A)?
(ii) If the answer to question (1) is in the negative, then whether the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(CGST Act) can directly or indirectly deal with aspects touching upon sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption by the applicant either with reference to levy of tax on such sale or with reference to reversal of credit solely because the applicant is effecting sale of such alcoholic liquor?
(iii) Under these circumstances, whether the definition of exempt supply as provided under section 2(47) of the CGST Act, read with definition of the term ‘non-taxable supply’ under section 2(78) can therefore include sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption by the applicant?
(iv) Whether in order to qualify as non-taxable supply under section 2(78), a transaction must first qualify as supply as defined in section 7 of the CGST Act read with Article 246A and Article 366(12A) of the Constitution and as such therefore, sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption cannot be said to qualify as a ‘supply’ for the above purposes under the ambit of the CGST Act.
(v) Consequently, whether the applicant is obliged to reverse input tax credit (ITC) under section 17(2) of the CGST Act read with rule 42 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (CGST Rules) in view of the sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption effected by it at its premises under the facts & circumstances of the present case?
The applicant has withdrawn the questions under serial number (i) to (iv) and has also rephrased the question under serial number (v) as under:
Question: Whether or not the applicant is obliged to reverse input tax credit (‘ITC’) under Section 17(2) of the CGST Act read with Rule 42 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (‘CGST Rules’), in view of the sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption effected by it at its premises under the facts & circumstances of the present case?
Answer: Under the facts & circumstances of the present case, the applicant is required to reverse input tax credit (‘ITC’) in terms of sub-section (2) of section 17 of the GST Act read with Rule 42 of the GST Rules for sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption.
WBAAAR: The sale of alcoholic liquor for human cor-rsurxption is a non-taxable supply under Section 2(78) of the GST Act,20l7 and subsequently is an exempt supply under Section 2(47) ibid. Therefore, the appellant is required to reverse input tax credit (ITC) in terms of sub-section (2) of section 17 ibid read with Rule 42 of the GST Rules, 2011 for sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption.
Held: The WBAAR Ruting No. 22/WBAAR/2022-23 dated 09.02.2023 is confirmed and the Appeal stands rejected.
Advance Ruling No. and Date : GST-ARA-50/2020-21/8-108 dated 01.12.2022.
Questions before the Maharastra Authority for Advance Ruling [‘MHAAR’], Goods and Service Tax -
Whether mere transfer of monetary proceeds by the IVL India Environmental R&D PVT Ltd (hereinafter referred to as 'the Applicant' or “IVL India”) to IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute Limited (hereinafter referred to as “IVL Sweden”), without underlying import of service will be liable for payment of Integrated Goods and Service Tax under reverse charge mechanism under entry no. 1 of Notification 10/2017 - IGST (Rate) dated June 28, 2017.
Maharastra Authority for Advance Ruling [‘MHAAR’], Goods and Service Tax ruled as -
In view of the above discussions, the transfer of monetary proceeds by the Applicant IVL Sweden, will be liable for payment of Integrated Goods and Service Tax under reverse charge mechanism under Entry No. 1 of Notification 10/2017 - IGST (Rate) dated June 28, 2017.
MHAAAR: It is clear that the said support services received by the Appellant from IVL Sweden will come under the ambit of import of services as the said services fulfill all the criteria of the import of services.
Once it has been established that service under question is import of services, the same will be liable for payment of IGST at the hands of the recipient of services in terms entry 1 of the Notification No. 10/2017-I.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
Held: We, hereby, uphold the MAAR Order No. GST-ARA-50/2020-21/B-108 dated 01.12.2022 vide which it has been held that the transfer of monetary proceeds by the Applicant to IVL Sweden, will be liable for payment of Integrated Goods and Service Tax under reverse charge mechanism under Entry No. 1 of Notification 10/2017 - IGST (Rate) dated June 28, 2017. Thus, the appeal filed by the Appellant is hereby rejected.
Advance Ruling No. and Date : GST-ARA-59/2020-21/8-56 dated 27.04.2022.
Questions before the Maharastra Authority for Advance Ruling [‘MHAAR’], Goods and Service Tax and their answers are -
Question 1): - Whether the Incentive received from Intel inside US LLC under Intel Approved Component Supplier Program (IACSP) can be considered as Trade Discount?
Answer: - Answered in the negative.
Question 2):-If not considered as Trade Discount then whether it is consideration for any supply?
Answer: - Answered in the affirmative.
Question 3): - If it is considered as supply than whether it will qualify as export of service?
MHAAAR: The marketing services are provided in respect of goods which are made physically available by the recipient of services (i.e. IIUL through its distributors) to the supplier of marketing services (i.e. the appellant), in order to provide the services. Therefore, as per Section 13(3)(a), the place of provision of service is the location of the supplier of services i.e. the applicant, which is in India. Hence, we hold that the impugned supply does not qualify as export of services.
Held: We confirm and uphold the Advance Ruling Bearing No. GST-ARA-59/2020-21/B-56 dated 27.04.2022 pronounced by the MAAR. Therefore, the Appeal filed by the Appellant is, hereby, dismissed.
Advance Ruling No. and Date : GST-ARA-122/2019-20/8-54 dated 27.04.2022.
Questions before the Maharastra Authority for Advance Ruling [‘MHAAR’], Goods and Service Tax and answers are -
Question: Whether the reimbursement amount received by the Applicant from Trainer towards “Stipend and other expenses incurred by the Applicant in accordance with AICTE (NEEM) Regulations to ensure wealth safety and health of NEEM Trainees” Is in the capacity of pure agent and hence not includible in the value of taxable supply made by the Applicant to Trainer for the purpose of payment of Goods and Service Tax (“GST”)?
Answer: Not answered in view of discussions made above.
MHAAAR: We find on merits that the appellant do not fulfil the conditions and clauses of meaning of “pure agent” prescribed under rule 33 of the CGST Rules, 2017. Hence, the appellant is not allowable to claim deduction of the reimbursement of amount of stipends and other expenses received from the NEEM Trainer from the value of supply.
Held: The order No. GST-ARA-122/2019-20/B-54 dated 27.04.2022 passed by the Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling is upheld with some modification. It is held that the reimbursement amount received by the Appellant from NEEM Trainer towards “Stipend and other expenses incurred by the Applicant in accordance with AICTE (NEEM) Regulations to ensure wealth, safety and health of NEEM Trainees” is not in the capacity of pure agent. In the result the appeal filed by the M/S Beeup Skills Foundation (erstwhile M/s Beep Skills Foundation or M/s CLR Skills Training Foundation) against impugned MAH-AAR order is rejected.
