In re Rishabh Chopda (GST AAR Maharashtra)
The first question raised by the applicant is whether the co-operative society, in the present case has to issue four separate invoices to each of the four co-owners so that all of them can get proportionate input tax credit.
We find that the said question is raised on behalf of the co-operative society and that too in respect of some procedure to he followed pertaining to issue of invoices.
Section 95 allows this authority to decide the matter in respect of supply of goods or services or both, undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant on the matters or questions specified in sub-section (2) of section 97. We fin::: that, in the subject case the maintainance charges are collected by the society for having rendered Club or association services to all the four co-owners including the applicant. Thus we find that the supply of services, in respect of which the question has been raised, is being undertaken by the society and not by the applicant. Applicant is a recipient of services in the subject transaction. The impugned question raised by applicant is in relation to procedure to be followed by the society in respect of issue of invoices to applicant for the common area maintenance charges and hence the issue is not within the purview of Section 97(2) under the Act. Therefore, the subject application cannot be admitted. Hence we do not discuss the merits of the case.
The second question that is being asked in the subject case is whether there are any provisions under the CGST Act, 2017 by which credit of lumpsum CGST charged to the only one co-owner can he transferred to the other co-owners proportionately.
We have already held above that the subject application cannot be admitted. Further, it is also seen that the question raised does not fall under any of the provisions of Section 97 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017.
In view of the above we find that the present application seeking ruling on question staled here in above is not maintainable and liable for rejection.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA
PROCEEDINGS
(Under Section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
The present application has been filed under Section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as the CGST Act and MOST Act” respectively ] by M/s. RISHABH CHOPDA., the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions.
1. When there are four joints owners of a property and in turn the joint owners are liable for GST on the rent income that they are receiving on ‘Leave and License’, on the common Area Maintenance Charges charged, the co-operative society has to issue four separate invoice showing the respective ownership share ratio of the each owner and mentioning the GSTIN of each owner in the respective invoices in order to get input tax credit by each of the co-owner?
2. Is there any provision under the CGST Act, 2017 by which lumpsum CGST charged to the cot one co-owner the credit of which can be transferred to the other co-owners?
At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the COST Act and the MGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to any dissimilar provisions, a reference to the COST Act would also mean a reference to the same provision under the MOST Act. Further to the earlier, henceforth for the purposes of this Advance Ruling, the expression `GST Act’ would mean CGST Act and MOST Act.
2. FACTS AND CONTENTION –AS PER THE APPLICANT
The submissions made by Mr. Rishab Chopda, the applicant are as under:-
2.1 Applicant is residing in Bangalore, Karnataka State along with his father and mother. All of them are directors in M/s Rishabh Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (RIPL), Chhattisgarh State.
2.2 Applicant along with his parents and RIPL purchased two commercial properties at CNERGY IT PARK Co-operative Premises Society Ltd., in Mumhai. Their respective shares in the said properties are as under:
