Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR)

1. Whether the work done by the applicant (NHAI) in shifting the Transmission lines for the widening of road under the supervision of MVVNL comes under the definition of supply as per section 15(2)(b) of C.G.S.T. Act, 2017 ?

2. Whether GST is to be paid to MVVNL on the full amount of work done for shifting the transmission lines by NHAI?

3. Without prejudice to the submissions made hereinabove and hereinafter, if the NHAI pays  GST on the entire value of work done to its contractors and also to MVVNL, then how will this payment of same amount of GST on the same transaction to two separate entities, not constitute double taxation?

1. Whether the ‘Architectural Consultancy Service’ provided by the applicant to Surat Municipal Corporation for construction of SMIMER Hospital & College Campus is covered under entry no. 3 of notification No. 12/2017-Central (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 & thus is exempt?

2. If the exemption under entry no. 2 of the notification No. 12/2017-Central (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 is applicable to the applicant, accordingly will the ‘pure services’ provided by a sub contractor to the applicant also be covered under the said exemption? Or if the applicant provides sub contract of pure services to another contractor of the SMC will the exemption be available to the applicant provided that the exemption is available to the direct contractor of SMC?

3. If the entry number 3 of the notification No. 12/2017-Central (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 is not applicable to the applicant then accordingly the services provided by the applicant will be taxed under which HSN/SAC code and the rate of tax thereof?

M/s. Leap Ecotec Solutions Private Limited, Hyderabad, have informed that they intended to withdraw their application of Advance Ruling. The request is considered. In view of the above, the application filed by M/s. Leap Ecotec Solutions Private Limited, Hyderabad is withdrawn as infructuous.

1. Whether they are liable for GST registration?

2. Whether they are liable to pay tax under GST registration

"i. Whether the applicant is liable to charge GST, if the booking of plot, receipt of consideration and agreement for sale is entered as well as sale deed is executed after the release certificate, on the following components (Under Section 97(2)(e ) of CGST / KGST Act):

a. Sale of Plot;

b. Basic Infrastructure Development charges; and

c. Other common amenities and facilities charges.

ii. Whether the applicant is liable to charge GST, if the booking of plot and / or receipt of consideration and / or agreement for sale is entered prior to the release certificate and sale deed is executed after receipt of release certificate, on the following components  (Under Section 97(2)(e) of CGST / KGST Act):

a. Sale of Plot;

b. Basic Infrastructure Development charges; and

c. Other common amenities and facilities charges.

iii. What is the applicability of GST if the sale price is a consolidated price in the agreement for sale towards land cost, basic infrastructure development charges and other common amenities and facilities charges? (Under Section 97(2)(e) of CGST / KGST Act)"

1.Whether the supply of medicines and other procedures during treatment inpatients admitted to hospital is a composite supply?

2.Whether supply of medicines and other procedures to inpatients admitted to hospital for treatment is a composite supply, where principal supply is health care services falling under SAC 999311, which is exempted as per entry at SI. No. 74 of Notification No. 1212017 – Central Tax dated 28-06-2017 ?

The Applicant vide their letter dated 18.04.2023 has requested to withdraw the Advance Ruling Application filed before the authority. Since the applicant has requested for withdrawal of the application therefore, their request to withdraw the application is considered. Hence, no ruling is given.

Whether the supply of services by treatment of patients suffering from SUD as out-patient is exempt under entry 74(a) of notification no. 12/2017 CGST Rate dated 28-06-2017?

1. Whether in the given facts and circumstances ( In Annexure 1) value of material and cost of execution work for installation of lines will be included in the value of supply for determination of taxable value under GST where all such cost are taken as reimbursement while our supply is only supervision charges.

2. Whether in the given facts and circumstances ( In Annexure No. 1 ) value of material and cost of execution work for installation of lines will be included in the value of supply for determination of taxable value under GST where all such costs are born by the recipient of service and we charge only supervision charges

Q-1 Whether the services supplied by the KESCO by way of utility shifting are integral part of services supplied by KESCO by way of distribution of electricity?
Q-2 Whether the services supplied by the KESCO by way of utility shifting are ancillary to the principal supply  of services by way of  distribution       of electricity?
Q-3 Whether the exemption given under Entry 25 of the Exemption Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 with respect to the services by way of transmission and distribution of electricity is available to the KESCO ?
Q-4 If the answer to issue No.3 is Yes, whether the Applicant is liable to pay GST on the activity of utility shifting perform by KESCO or by itself as such utility shifting is an integral part of services supplied by KESCO by way of distribution of electricity which is exempted from levy GST?
Q-5 If the answer to issue No.3 is No, whether the situation faced by the Applicant wherein KESCO has provided only supervision services and not borne cost towards labour and material, shall be govern by provisions of Section 15(1) or by section 15(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with section 15 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the purposes of determining transaction value of supply?
Q-6 Whether the applicant is liable to pay GST on services supplied by KESCO by way of supervision, only on the Supervision charges (i.e., 5% of estimated cost of deposit work) or on the estimated cost of deposit work as depicted in letter dated 03.09.2022? (Letter dated 03.09.2022 is Annexed here with as Annexure-A).
We find that Applicant M/S Uttar Pradesh Metro Rail Corporation Limited is receiver of the Goods/Services provided by the KESCO. In light of point (a) provided under Section 95 of CGST Act 2017, only supplier of the services can file Application for Advance Ruling. In this case the supplier of service is KESCO. Also in the similar matter M/s Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited had applied for advance ruling as supplier of service and advance ruling authority has ruled on merit. Accordingly, we do not admit the application for consideration/ruling on merits as applicant does not fall under the definition of Advance Ruling.