Appellate Orders

The Maharashtra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling while confirming the order of the Maharashtra Advance Ruling Authority held that the contract in the impugned case is though a composite supply not for immoveable property, and therefore does not fall under the definition of ‘works contract’. The principal supply in the case is of Air conditioning units and the entire contract is taxable @ 28%.

The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, , modified the ruling pronounced by the Advance Ruling Authority in so far the observation of the facts and legal provisions are concerned and pass the order by holding that the Appellant is not entitled to avail the  ITC of GST paid on goods and services used for construction of Tie-in pipelines, from the FSRU to the National grid as per the provision laid out in section 17(5)(c) and 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act, 2017.

The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling set aside the ruling pronounced bh the Advance Ruling Authority, holding that  for the purpose of Cess @ 22% under Sr. No. 52B of Cess Rate Notification, the ground clearance of the vehicle is to be considered in laden condition only, and accordingly, the vehicle whose ground clearance in unladen condition is more than 170mm but below 170mm in laden condition, will not get covered under Sr. No. 52B of Cess Rate Notification.

The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling  amended the para 19 of the original AAAR Order No.  MAH/AAAR/SS-RJ/32/2018-19 dated 23.04.2019 in as much as the membership fee, collected by the Respondent from its members, will not construed as consideration for levy of GST; rather it is the registration fee, collected by the Respondent from its members for organising the skill oriented workshops, will be construed as consideration against the supply made by the Respondent to its members, and accordingly will be leviable to GST, while maintaining that Lions Club of Poona Kothrud, on account of the activities i.e. organizing training programs/workshops for its members, is liable to  take registration for discharging their GST liability.  

The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that since, the questions raised by the Appellant is not covered under our scope and jurisdiction, therefore, no ruling can be passed in the instant matter.

The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that since, the questions raised by the Appellant is not covered under our scope and jurisdiction, therefore, no ruling can be passed in the instant matter.

The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that since, the questions raised by the Appeallant is not covered under our scope and jurisdiction, therefore, no ruling can be passed in the instant matter, and therefore, the ruling passed by the Advance Ruling Authority is hereby quashed.

The appellate authority for advance ruling uphold the ruling passed under section 98(4) of the CGST Act 2017 vide NO.KAR ADRG 64/2019 dated 20-09-2019 i.e. Contention of the appellant is dismissed on all accounts.