Case Law Details
In re Centre For Symbiosis of Technology (GST AAR Karnataka)
The applicant provided consultancy services to KUIDFC for the program called NKUSIP, involving supervision and programme management consultancy for the PMC works undertaken in divisions of Bellary and Gulbarga. Accordingly, the applicant entered into an agreement dated 26.07.2017 and completed the project during 2019. The instant application was filed on 08.11.2022, after completion of the said project in 2019, as the applicant intends to seek clarity as to whether services rendered to KUIDFC are exempted from GST or not. In the instant case the maintainability of the application needs to be examined.
In this regard we observe that Section 95(a) of the CGST Act 2017, while defining the term ‘advance ruling’, stipulates that an applicant can seek advance ruling on the questions specified under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act 2017, in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the said applicant.
It is pertinent to mention here that the word “being” is the present participle of the verb “be” and used to form tenses in the progressive (or continuous) aspect. A present participle is a verb form (or verbal) made by adding -ing to the base that often functions as an adjective. Use of present participle denotes present and continuing action. Thus the phrase ‘being undertaken’ refers to an ongoing and continuous supply.
The GST Flyer also says that the definition of Advance Ruling under the CGST Act 2017 is a broad one, which can be given on a proposed transaction as well as a transaction already being undertaken by the applicant, which is an ongoing transaction.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
