Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : In re Studio 30 Architects & Planners (GST AAR Karnataka)
Appeal Number : Advance Ruling No. KAR ADRG 21/2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 25/06/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

In re Studio 30 Architects & Planners (GST AAR Karnataka)

In the case of M/s. Studio 30 Architects & Planners (GST AAR Karnataka), the applicant, a partnership firm providing architect services, sought an advance ruling under Section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 and KGST Act, 2017. The specific question was whether the provisions of Section 12(3) of the IGST Act, 2017 are applicable to a sub-consultant, given that the sub-consultants provide drawings to the applicant, which are then incorporated into the final drawings given to the customer without any direct interaction between the sub-consultants and the client.

Before the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) could issue a decision, the applicant requested to withdraw their application. This request was communicated via email dated 19th March 2024.

Consequently, the AAR Karnataka disposed of the application as withdrawn, without issuing a ruling on the applicability of Section 12(3) of the IGST Act, 2017 to the sub-consultant.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA

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

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031