Appellate Orders

The appellant is eligible to adopt the value as per second proviso to Rule 28 of the CGST/ TNGST Rules 2017, at the time of supply of goods from the State of Tamil Nadu in the terms of the scenario discussed, in as much as the recipient distinct person is eligible for input tax credit as required under the said proviso. 

Advance Ruling Pronounced by AAR upheld.  Appeal Dismissed

Advance Ruling Pronounced by AAR upheld.  Appeal Dismissed

Advance Ruling Pronounced by AAR upheld.  Appeal Dismissed

Appeal by the party is rejected and Advance Ruling pronounced by AAR is upheld.
The appellant is supplying various services like supply of  food, TV in dining hall, playroom, gym, housekeeping of entire hostel premises, room cleaning and washing/ dry-cleaning of bed sheets and linen of rooms along with hostel accommodation service. AAAR is of the view that supply of various other services with hostel accommodation service is not naturally bundled in normal course of business. Each service is an independent service and can be supplied separately.

Appeal by the party is rejected.
Supply of Branded Frozen Chicken packed by the appellant in individual LDPE bag in pre-determined quantities (one in number) and supplied to the Indian Army and Paramilitary forces in the HDPE bags as supply in Unit Container and not exempted under Entry No. 9 of the Notification No. 2/2017-CT (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 (as amended).

Appeal by the party was accepted. Remuneration paid to independent directors or those directors who are not the employee of the appellant is taxable in hands of the appellant on reverse charge basis. The part of the declared as salaries in the books of the appellant and subjected to TDS under Section 192 of the IT Act are not taxable. 

Appeal by the party is rejected.
It was held that the work undertaken by the appellant of AVVNL is an original work which is incidental or meant predominant for use of commerce, Industry or any other  business or profession. It was held that work of AVVNL undertaken by the appellants not covered under Entry No. 3 (iv) (a) of the Notification No. 11/2017 (as amended)

Seeking an appeal against Advance Ruling passed by AAR, Odisha on the applicability and benefit/exemption w.r.t Entry No. 72 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 read with Entry No. 72 of Notification bearing SRO No. 306/2017-Finance Department, Govt. of Odisha to the services provided by them under the category of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) @ School Project. The AAR, while giving its ruling had mentioned that the activities of the applicant by way of supply of goods and services under the ICT project are not covered under Entry 72 of the above mentioned notification, hence not entitled for benefit of exemption from GST. Advance Ruling pronounced by the AAR, Odisha was upheld and the appeal stands rejected.

* The Member(SGST) has upheld the order of the AAR.

* The Member (CGST) has set aside the order of the AAR in favor of the Appellant. 

* Therefore, as per Section 101(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 it shall be deemed that no advance Ruling can be issued in respect of the question under the Appeal.