Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR)

Sr. No. Name of the Applicant States/UT Brief of Order ­in ­Appeal (OIA) Order No. & Date Download Category
2151 McAfee Software (India) Pvt. Ltd Karnataka

a) Whether the marketing service provided by the application is taxable under the GST provisions and if yes, what is the SAC and the applicable rate of tax?
b) Whether the services provided by the applicant to McAfee Singapore qualifies as export of services under the provisions of the IGST Act considering the fact that:
a. The applicant is located in India
b. The overseas entity is located in Singapore
c. The place of supply is outside India
d. The consideration for providing the services is received by the applicant in foreign currency; and
e. The applicant and overseas entity are two separate legal entities established under the laws of India and Singaporerespectively.

c) That the services are not “intermediary” services.

KAR/AAR/56/2019-20 dated 19.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 10.8 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (a) (e)
2152 V.S.T Tillers Tractors Ltd. Karnataka

Whether the applicant is right in classifying certain components, spares and accessories with HSNs under reference applicable to Tractors, Tillers and other farm equipments though such goods are sold to them under different HSNs attracting peak rate due to certain constraints.

KAR/AAR/53/2019-20 dated 19.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 5.36 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (e)
2153 Parker Hannifin India Pvt. Ltd Karnataka

a) Whether filters manufactured solely and principally for use by/ in Indian Railways and supplied directly to Indian Railways are classifiable under HSN Heading 8421 or under HSN Heading 8607 of the Customs Tariff (which has been borrowed for classification purposes under GST regime)?
b) Whether the aforementioned classifications of subject goods i.e. filter alter if identical goods are supplied to a distributor instead of Indian railways directly, and the distributor in turn effects supply to Indian railways?

KAR/AAR/54/2019-20 dated 19.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 10.68 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (a)
2154 Fulcrum Info Services LLP, Karnataka

a) Whether the back-end support services provided by the applicant to the Juniper Inc. under the agreement would be classified as ‘Support Services’ under the Tariff Heading 9985 of Notification 11/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017?
b) Whether the services in question would be treated as Intermediary services or not?

KAR/AAR/55/2019-20 dated 19.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 7.89 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (a)
2155 GDC Dimension Data Pvt. Ltd. Karnataka

What is the correct Service Accounting Code (SAC) for the services mentioned below in terms of Notification No.11/ 2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017?
a. IT Support Services
b. IT Managed Services

KAR/AAR/57/2019-20 dated 19.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 5.54 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (a)
2156 Humble Mobile Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Karnataka

Whether the applicant is liable to pay tax for supply of services by another person through the e-commerce platform operated by the applicant?

KAR/AAR/58/2019-20 dated 19.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 6.54 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (e)
2157 N Ranga Rao & Sons Pvt Ltd Karnataka

(a) Whether the applicant is eligible to claim refund of accumulated input tax credit on both inputs and input services where a scenario of inverted duty structure exists?
(b) Whether the provisions of Notification No. 21/2018-Central Tax dated April 18, 2018 and Notification No. 26/2018-Central Tax dated June 13, 2018 are applicable to the applicant?

KAR/AAR/50/2019-20 dated 18.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 4.7 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (b)
2158 Yashaswini Enterprises Karnataka

Whether the transaction of the applicant  relating to execution of the works contract  pertains to  energised borewells  is it covered under article 243G of the Constitution, their supply is meant to the Government Entity and hence it is exempted under Sl.No.3A of Notification No. 2/2018 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 25/01/2018.  Thus the applicant contends that their activity / service is taxable at NIL rate or not ?

KAR/AAR/51/2019-20 dated 18.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 4.21 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (b)
2159 Toyota Tsusho India Private Ltd Karnataka

a) Whether the restriction introduced by Notification No. 3/2018 – Central tax (later substituted by Notification No.39/2018- Central Tax dated 04.09.2018 retrospectively from 23.10.2017) on claiming refund of IGST paid on export of goods by inserting Rule 96(10) is applicable only on such export of goods for which corresponding inward supplies were procured at a concessional rate of 0.10% GST under Notification No. 40/2017- Central Tax (Rate), thereby holding that such restriction on IGST refund does not apply on export of goods which were procured on full payment of GST?
b) Alternatively, whether the above restriction prohibits refund of IGST paid in its entirety even on such exports where the goods have been procured on payment of full rate of GST by the person who procures only a small quantity of goods at concessional rate of 0.10% GST under Merchant Export Scheme as provided under Notification No. 40/2017- Central Tax (Rate)?

KAR/AAR/52/2019-20 dated 18.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 6.05 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (b)
2160 S.K. Aagrotechh Karnataka

Whether “Pooja oil” can be classified under tariff item 1518 of Schedule-I (taxable at 5%.) or Schedule-II (taxable at 12%) of Notification No.01/2017-CT(R) dated 28.06.2017, as amended from time to time?

KAR/AAR/49/2019-20 dated 18.09.2019

application-pdf(Size: 2.27 मेगा बाइट)

97 (2) (a)