In re M/s TP Ajmer Distribution Limited (GST AAAR Rajasthan)
AAAR held that no GST is chargeable on the delayed payment charges collected from the consumers for delay in payment of consideration for supply of electricity. While GST is chargeable on the cheque dishonor charges collected ( by whatever name) from the consumers.
Also Read AAR Ruling- GST payable on non-tariff charges recovered by electricity distribution Company
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF APPELLATE AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN
1. At the outset we would like to make it clear that provisions of both the Central GST Act, 2017 and Rajasthan GST Act, 2017 are same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the Central GST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under Rajasthan GST Act.
2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Central GST Act, 2017 (hereinafter also referred to as ‘CGST Act’) and Rajasthan GST Act, 2017 (hereinafter also referred to as ‘RGST Act’) by M/s TP Ajmer Distribution Limited, Ajmer against the Advance Ruling No. RAJ/AAR/2018-19/03 dated 11.05.2018
CONDONATION OF DELAY
3. The first issue relates to the issue of condonation of delay in filing appeal under Section 100(2) of the CGST Act. The Appellants has submitted that in the instant matter, the impugned advance ruling dated 11.5.2018 passed by the Learned Rajasthan Authority for Advance Ruling (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. AAR”) was communicated to them on 25.05.2018. Accordingly, considering the time limit of 30 days for filing the appeal, appeal was to be filed by 24.6.2018.
4. The appellants has submitted that the GST is a new levy, they did not have a detailed understanding of the provisions of CGST Act. They became aware of the fact that the Appeal against the impugned advance ruling ought to have be filed within 30 days, only when the same was pointed out to it by the advocates. Thus, they were under a bonafide belief that the time limit for filing an appeal against impugned advance ruling passed by the Ld. AAR had not lapsed.
5. Further, the appellants has submitted that during the month of June 2018, Mr. Kailash Pati Mali, their Chief Finance Officer (CFO) was, inter alia, occupied in handling the queries and requirement of the Auditors for the quarterly Audits of the company. The Taxation matter of the appellants are looked after by Mr. Kailash Mali. Since, Mr. Kailash Mali was busy in the Quarterly Audit, the Appeal against the impugned Advance Ruling could not be filed within the aforementioned time limit. Consequently, there is a delay of 29 days in filing the appeal.
6. The appellants has requested to condone this delay and accept the appeal.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances narrated by the appellants , we condone the delay in filing the appeal and accept it for disposal.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
8. Tata Power Company Limited (‘TPCL’) has entered into a Distribution Franchisee Agreement (‘DFA’) with Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (‘AWNL’). In terms of the aforesaid DFA, TPCL has undertaken to supply Electricity to the customers of AVVNL in Ajmer district, Rajasthan, for a period of 20 years.
9. In order to fulfill its obligation under the DFA entered into with AVVNL, TPLC has set up a special purpose Vehicle (‘SPV’) under the name of M/s. TP Ajmer Distribution Limited (‘Appellant)
10. The Appellants are registered under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘CGST Act’) and holding GST Registration No. 08AAGCT2158P1ZR.
11. The appellants are responsible for operating and maintaining the distribution network in Ajmer City and supplying Electricity to Industrial and domestic consumers.
12. For the aforesaid activity, the appellants raise invoice on the customers for the consideration for supply of electricity.
13. The aforesaid charges are recovered in terms of the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Condition for Development of Tariff) Regulation, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “RERC Tariff Regulations”).
14. In addition to the Energy charges and distribution charges, the appellants also recover some Non-tariff charges from the customer for certain specific activities carried out by the appellants for the customers.
15. The various non-tariff charges collected from the customer can be broadly categorized as –
