In re CMS Info Systems Ltd. (GST AAAR Maharashtra)
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, hereby, hold that Input Tax Credit against the GST paid on the purchase, and fabrication of the motor vehicles, used for carrying cash and bullions, is available to the Appellant.
Money, transported by the Appellant in the cash -carry vans, can be considered as goods, ITC in respect of the cash carry vans used for the transportation of cash will be available to the Appellant in accordance with provisions of section 17(5)(a)(ii) of the CGST Act, 2017.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF APPELLATE THE AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA
(under Section 101 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST 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 MGST Act. Further, the CGST Act, 2017 and MGST Act, 2017, sometimes, shall also be referred as GST Act.
M/s CMS Info Systems Limited (herein after referred to as the “Appellant”) had filed application for advance ruling under the provision of Section 97(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. However, the members of the Advance Ruling Authority differed in their opinion in deciding one of the two issues/questions raised by the applicant before them, and consequently had referred the same to the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling in terms of section 98(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 for decision on the said question. Accordingly, the said issue, which remain undecided by the Authority for Advance Ruling owing to the difference in their opinions, was eventually decided by the Appellant Authority for Advance Ruling vide Order No. MAH/AAAR/SS-RJ/04A/2018-19 dated 06.08.2018. The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling vide the aforesaid order had held that the Appellant was not eligible to claim ITC in respect of the Cash Carry Vans, which were used to carry cash as a part of the services provided to their clients as it was observed that the cash or currency, being transported by the Appellant will not be considered as goods as per the definition of the goods provided in section 2(52) of the CGST Act, which inter alia categorically excludes money from the purview of the goods.
Aggrieved by the said AAAR Order dated 06.08.2018, the Appellant had filed writ petition in the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Thereafter, Hon’ble High Court, vide its order dated 09.07.2019, set aside the impugned AAAR order dated 06.08.218 and directed AAAR to hear and decide the case after considering various submissions made by the Appellant.
In view of the aforesaid Hon’ble Bombay High Court Order, we set out to decide the subject-question asked by the Appellant vide the advance ruling application, filed by them before the Advance Ruling Authority, and which was eventually referred to us in terms of section 98(5) of the CGST Act, 2017.
At the outset, we will reproduce the relevant facts of the case below.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
1. The Appellant is having cash management network pan India. During the course of providing the cash management services, the appellant is engaged in the following activities:-
