In re Karve Institute of Social Service (GST AAR Maharashtra) The applicant has submitted a letter dated 28.04.2022 and requested that they may be allowed to voluntarily withdraw their subject application filed on 01.09.2021. The request of the applicant to withdraw their application voluntarily and unconditionally is hereby allowed, without going into the merits or […]
In re CLR Skills Training Foundation (Beeup Skills Foundation) (GST AAR Maharashtra) AAR find that, both the Agreements attached by the applicant as ‘Specimen Copies” in respect of the subject application do not provide a clear picture of the actual facts in respect of the present matter before us and we therefore, cannot answer the […]
In Re Aryan Contractor Pvt Ltd (GST AAR Maharashtra) The questions for obtaining an Advance Ruling can be asked by a supplier of goods or services or both, only in relation to the supply being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken and not in relation to any supply of goods or services or both which […]
AAR held that assessee providing marketing services to a foreign company and acting as a conduit between a foreign company and its Indian customers to be considered as intermediary.
Since provisions of Sec 95 (a) are very clear and unambiguous that only a supplier can file an application for advance ruling, the contentions of the applicant are not accepted. The said provisions were discussed with the applicant’s authorized representative during the course of the final hearing and he agreed that the questions are not maintainable and not capable of being covered under Scope of section 95(a) of GST Act.
In re Crystal Crop Protection Limited (GST AAR Maharashtra) Question 1: – Whether the transaction of transfer of business by way of merger of two GST registrations/ distinct persons would constitute ‘supply’ under the GST law? Answer: – Answered in the affirmative. Question 2: – Whether the transaction of transfer of business by way of merger of two […]
In re Star motors & Other 27 Applicants (MVAT AAR Maharashtra) Q.1 Whether the One time ‘RTO Tax (Road Tax),’ required to be paid to Maharashtra Government for use of Motor Vehicle collect and paid by the dealer for the purchaser of Motor Vehicle and Insurance premium’ after registration of Motor Vehicle on the name of purchaser […]
Since the major part of the work order, i.e., about 91%, is ‘Earth Work, the said work order of JV qualifies for the benefit of exemption under Sr. No. 3A of the Notification No. 12/2017-CTR dt. 08.06.2017, as amended by Notification No. 2/2018-CTR dt 25.01.2018, i.e. GST rate is NIL as Sr. no. 3 of Eleventh Schedule of Article 243G of the Constitution
As per stages of completion of work, Ai raising invoice to GMIDC, Aurangabad and on the same basis, as a JV member, applicant is raising invoice to N. Applicant, as a Ai member has got work order consisting of Earth Work such as Excavation for Tunnel, removing of excavated stuff, providing steel support, rock bolting, reinforcement, fixing of chain link, cement concerting etc. wherein total earth work is approximately 91%, construction work being around 9% wherein transfer of property is involved.
In re Mahalakshmi BT Patil Honai Construction (JV) (GST AAR Maharashtra) The first question raised by the applicant is whether the impugned contract is covered under the term ‘Earth Work’ and therefore covered under SI No 3A- Chapter No. 9954 as per Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended by Notification No. 2/2018-C.T. (Rate) […]
