Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR)

1)Whether interlining fabrics is Classified under HSN code 5903 or should be Classified as further bland of yarn (In chapter 52-55)?

1)As per the Advance Ruling Tanakpur power station, NHPC has been exempted from GST as per notification no. 12/2017,central tax(Rate) dated 28-06-17 (as amended time to time) but will this entails other agencies and contractor/ sub-contractors not to charge GST in their invoices. If the activity of constructing Indo-Nepal border rode is exempted as per advance ruling will this permit all the contractor and sub-contractors involved in this project be exempted or otherwise?

(a) Whether the terms of the NIT, in particular its self-styled description as 'lump sum turnkey' contract, renders it as a 'works contract as understood under the GST law?

(b) In the event the answer to (a) is in the affirmative, does it imply that each and every supply made to ONGC under the contract would be subject to rate of tax as applicable to a 'works contract'?

( c) In the event the answer to (a) is in the affirmative;

(A) Will the position change if the members of the consortium raise distinct invoices and ONGC also pays directly to the members?

(B) Can it be said that in such circumstances the individual invoices will not be affected by the overall description as a 'works contract'?

(d) In the event the answer to (a) is in the affirmative and only one single rate of tax applies to the entire contract, can the members of the claim rate of tax in terms of Notification No. 39/2017 - Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 13.10.2017?

(e) In the given facts of the instant application, can the member of the consortium supplying goods alone claim concessional rate of tax of 5% in terms of Notification No. 3/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017? 

Whether the members of RWA are liable to pay GST on the services received by them directly from third party despite maintenance charges being less than Rs. 7500/- per month.

Ans- The ruling cannot be given as the matter doesn’t fall within the purview of “Advance Ruling” in term of Section 95(a) of CGST/SGST Act, 2017

Whether the Project Development Service (i.e. Detailed project Report Service) and Project Management Consultancy Services (PMCS) provided by the applicant to recipient under the contract of SUDA; and the Project Management Consultancy Services (PMC) under the Contract for PMAY would qualify as an activity in relation to function entrusted to Panchayat or Municipality under Article 243 G or Article 243 W respectively, of the Constitution of India?

The use of the name of the Applicant i.e. General Mills India Pvt Ltd on the packaging for supply of products by the Applicant solely for the limited purpose of complying with the mandatory requirement under Chapter 2 of FSSAI Regulations and not for the purpose / with the intention of indicating a connection in the course of trade between the Products and the applicant, does not amount to ‘bearing a registered brand name’ or bearing a brand name on which an actionable claim or enforceable right in a court of law is available’ in terms of S.N. 73 of the Notification No. 28/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 22 September 2017 (Amending Notification)

1) "Whether the supply of Solar rooftop power plant along with design Erection, Commissioning and Installation is a 'Composite supply' and the applicability of GST rate"?
2) "Whether the supply of solar irrigation water pumping system along withdesign erection, commissioning and installation is a 'composite supply' and the applicability of GST rate"?

a) Whether in the facts and circumstances in the case of supply involving leased circuit services wherein a pan India contract for supply of such services is entered into without any State wise break up for the supply it would be in order for the supplier of such services to charge Integrated Tax (under IGST Act) pursuant to the Explanation to Section 12(11)(d) which provides that place of supply, where the leased circuit is installed in more than one State and the value for service cannot be determined in absence of a contract, shall be on such other basis as prescribed i.e. the same would be the location of recipient of service.

b) In a case where the location of the service provider on pan India basis is Delhi and that of the recipient is Mumbai whether in the facts and circumstances, it would be Integrated tax that would be chargeable since no rules have been prescribed pursuant to Sec 12(11)(d) as aforesaid and therefore whether it would be in order for the recipient to take credit of such Intergraded tax since the said services are used in the course or furtherance of business namely provision of last mile connectivity services to the recipient of services.

1. Whether the amount of CENVAT Credit availed through TRAN-1, which partakes character of Central Tax in Electronic Credit Ledger, is admissible while calculating ‘ITC’ for GST Refund under inverted Tax Structure mechanism ?

2. Can a Circular, which is contrary to the legal provisions, be issued to restrict admissibility of ITC ? 

Whether, as per notification no. 01/2018 -  Central Tax (Rate) dated 25th January, 2018 can works ?