Case Law Details
In re Rameshwar Havelia (GST AAR Uttarakhand)
1. This is an application under Sub-Section (1) of Section 97 of the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 and Uttarakhand State Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as CGST/SGST Act) and the rules made there under filed by M/s Rameshwar Havelia with Trade name M/s Doon Valley Logistics, 271 KA, PO- Harrawala, Kuanwala, Haridwar Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand- 248160 (herein after referred to as the “applicant”) and registered with GSTIN -05AAMPH3802P1ZJ under the CGST Act, 2017 read with the provisions of the UKGST Act, 2017. In the application dated 05.05.2022, the applicant submitted that M/s Doon Valley Logistics, is a Proprietorship Firm of Sh. Rameshwar Havelia and has prospected for establishment of a warehouse at Village Kuanwala, PO Harrawala, Dehradun, with a prime objective of leasing the same against rental. For the same the applicant duly constructed foundation by procuring inputs/ manpower and then for further construction of the structure, they entered into an agreement with M/s Lohaar Engineering and Construction Pvt. Ltd., (contractor) vide agreement dated 21.08.2020. The contractor as well as suppliers of inputs required for construction of structure are duly stood registered under the provisions of GST Act,2017 and duly charged GST @18% on the value of works and deposited the same and the GST so deposited stands duly reflected in 2A/2B of the applicant. The applicant has already availed the ITC of GST paid by the contractor and is duly maintained in GST Credit Ledger, but no part of the same stands utilized till date. The availment of ITC on inward supplies of inputs/ input services is concerned, the same is available in terms of Sub-section (1) of Section 16, which reads “every registered person shall, subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed and in the manner specified in section 49, be entitled to take credit of input tax charged on any supply of goods or service or both to him, which are used or intended to be used in the course or furtherance of his business and the said amount shall be credited to the electronic credit ledger of such person”, but in terms of clause (c) of sub-section (5) of Section 17 of the GST Act,2017 and explanation appended to the same, ITC of the aforementioned service stands blocked. That even if it be so, the applicant has developed an infrastructure for being leased out against rental and the said rental is leviable to GST. Thus, the applicant is eligible to avail the ITC on inputs/ input services received for development of the said infrastructure, hence this application.
2. In view of the above facts, ‘the applicant’ is seeking an advance ruling on the issue as to “Whether the Input Tax Credit on Inputs and Input Services received for development of the said infrastructure by the applicant is admissible to them or not”?
3. At the outset, we would like to state that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the SGST Act are the same except for certain provisions; therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under the SGST Act.
4. The Advance Ruling under GST means a decision provided by the authority or the appellate authority to an applicant on matters or on questions specified in sub-section (2) of section 97 or sub section (1) of section 100 in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
ARA is wrong , it should give ruling without offending in case, where no verdict is available.