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.
Revenue submits that said civil structure may be used for commerce or business. We hold that a School building will be used by State Government for education and cannot be considered a commercial building.
AAR hold that a fire station will be used for fire services function as envisaged in schedule twelfth of our Constitution and cannot be considered a commercial building.
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) […]
In re Vasant Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Gujarat) Q1. Whether the activity of fabricating and mounting Tankers, Tippers, etc. on the chassis provided by the owner of such chassis i.e. bus body building would be covered under the category of Supply of Services? A1. Supply of Bus body building on the chassis owned by […]
In re Emcure Pharmaceuticals Limited (GST AAR Gujarat) Q1. Whether the recoveries made by the Applicant from the employees for providing canteen facility to its employees are taxable under the GST laws? A1. GST, at the hands of M/s Emcure, is not leviable on the amount representing the employees portion of canteen charges, which is […]
We find no reason to substitute the phrase ‘CGST Rules’ for the word ‘Notification’ referred to in section 97(2)(b). We find no merit in this submission and hold that AAR has its carved out functional jurisdiction to pass Rulings as per Section 97(2).
In re Cadmach Machinery Pvt Ltd (GST AAR Gujarat) Whether recovery of amount from employee on account of third party canteen service provided by assessee, which is obligatory under section 46 of Factories Act, 1948 would come under definition of, outward supply and, therefore, taxable as a supply under GST? Cadmach has arranged a canteen […]
