In re Hoerbiger India Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Maharashtra)
An application for advance ruling was filed before the Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra under Section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The applicant sought clarity on two sets of issues. The first related to whether recovery of a nominal amount from employees’ salaries for providing a canteen facility within factory premises constitutes a “supply of service” under GST law, whether GST would be payable on such recovery, and whether input tax credit (ITC) would be available on GST charged by the canteen service provider. The second issue concerned whether recovery of a nominal amount from employees’ salaries for providing non-air-conditioned bus transportation facilities amounts to a “supply of service”, whether GST would be payable on such recovery, and whether ITC would be available on GST charged by transport service providers.
Before the Authority could examine the merits of these questions, the applicant submitted a written communication dated 05.11.2025 stating that it no longer sought clarification on the questions raised. The applicant requested permission to withdraw the advance ruling application filed earlier. The Authority noted that the request for withdrawal was voluntary and unconditional. Accordingly, without examining the factual matrix or legal issues involved, and without expressing any view on the questions raised, the Authority allowed the withdrawal. The application was disposed of as withdrawn under Section 98 of the CGST Act and the MGST Act, with no ruling rendered on the substantive GST issues raised.
