Case Law Details
In re Jayshreeben Rameshchandra Kothari (GST AAAR Gujarat)
The appellant has provided ‘equipments on hire’ for ‘live videography’ during the events or programmes held by the Government Department for which ‘Hire Charges’ have been paid by the Government Department to the appellant. The activity of ‘providing equipments on hire’ or ‘live videography’ is not an activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat or a Municipality under Article 243G or Article 243W of the Constitution. The phrase ‘in relation to any function’ refers not to what activities the recipient of the service is engaged in, but to what service the supplier is providing. In order to be covered under entry at Sl. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), service by the appellant should relate to an activity listed in Article 243G or Article 243W read with Eleventh Schedule and Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution of India. The service of providing ‘equipments on hire’ for ‘live videography’ does not have any direct and proximate relationship with any of the activities listed in Article 243G or Article 243W read with Eleventh Schedule and Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution of India
14.4 In view thereof, we hold that the exemption provided vide Sl. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) is not admissible to the appellant for providing service of ‘equipment on hire’ for ‘live videography’ to the State Government.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF AUTHORITY OF APPELLATE ADVANCE RULING, GUJARAT
The appellant Ms. Jayshreeben Rameshchandra Kothari (Proprietor of Dimple Colour Lab) has submitted that she is engaged in providing ‘hiring service’ where she provides equipments such as live videography tools with LED and LCD screens, live telecast appliances, cameras etc. on hire basis to the Central Government, State Government, Union Territory, Local Authorities, Village Panchayat etc. It has been submitted that the appellant is responsible for erecting and installing such equipments at event place as per the directions of the Engineer in-charge and also responsible for operating the said equipments during the event as per the agreed terms. It has been further submitted that as per the ‘work orders’, the said equipments given on hiring basis should be used in specified manner as per the agreed terms and for specified events only, meaning thereby, there is no transfer of effective control and possession of equipments given on hire basis to the Government Department at any point of time. The appellant receives consideration in the form of ‘Hire Charges’ from the Government Department against the service provided by way of renting of equipment for cultural and social events. Once the event is complete, all the equipments deployed at the event sites are required to be dismantled and brought back by the staff of the appellant.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
