Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR)

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 In view of the above, the application filed by M/s. Leap Ecotec Solutions Private Limited, Hyderabad is withdrawn as infructuous.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 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?

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.

1. Whether the contract be completed during the Pre-GST period and the consequential demand based on the completed contract can be brought to assessment under GST Act, 2017?

2. Whether the liquidated damages, without any supply of materials and labor be assessed to GST under GST Act, 2017?

3. The mutually agreed and settled amount, based on arbitral award, in the nature of compensation, payable for delay in completion of the contract and agreed to be payable by the Applicant to DGAL without any supply of goods or services, is liable to be taxed under GST?

4. Whether DGAL is eligible to claim ITC on the GST amount if any levied on the mutually agreed arbitral award amount received from the Applicant?

5. Whether there is any taxability under GST on Interest payable on the liquidated damages?

"a. Whether the applicant is liable to be registered in Karnataka under KGST/CGST Act 2017?

Advance ruling regarding transfer of unutilized balance in E-credit ledger on merger of distinct persons as specified in Section 25 (4) i.e., on merger of two distinct persons within same State having same PAN in terms of Section 18 (3) of CGST Act.2017