Case Law Details
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.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
