Case Law Details
In re Kanchu Shiva Kumar (GST AAR Karnataka)
In the case of Kanchu Shiva Kumar (GST AAR Karnataka), the applicant, a proprietorship firm named M/s. Shrusti Constructions, sought an advance ruling under Section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 and KGST Act, 2017. The firm provides works contract services and has been charging GST at 12% to Karnataka Residential Educational Institutions Society (KREIS), assuming KREIS qualifies as a ‘Government Entity’. However, the department contends that KREIS does not qualify as a Government Entity, implying the applicable GST rate should be 18%.
The applicant sought clarification on the correct GST rate for their services. The applicant did not submit the hard copies of the application and later requested withdrawal of the application via email on May 16, 2024. The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) Karnataka allowed the withdrawal and disposed of the application as withdrawn.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA
Sri. Kanchu Shiva Kumar, Prop. M/s. Shrusti Constructions, NO.24/A, 1st Floor, RMV 2nd Stage, Sanjay Nagar, Bengaluru- 560094 having GSTIN 29CXXPS5739Q1ZS have filed an application, online, for Advance Ruling under Section 97 of CGST Act 2017 and KGAT Act 2017 read with Rule 104 of CGST Rules 2017 and KGST Rules 2017.
2. The Applicant is a Proprietorship firm, engaged in the business of works contract. They have been charging & collecting GST @ 12% from M/s Karnataka Residential Educational Institutions Society (KREIS) towards their supply, as the recipient (KREIS) is registered as a ‘Government Entity’. The applicable GST rate, on the said supply, as per the department’s contention is 18% basis the recipient KREIS does not qualify to be a Government Entity.
3. In view of the above, the applicant has sought advance ruling on the correct rate of GST applicable in the instant case.
4. The applicant had not submitted the hard copies of the instant application and on enquiry they informed through e-mail dated 16.05.2024 that they intend to withdraw the application and requested to permit them to withdraw the instant application.
5. In view of the above, we pass the following,
RULING
The application filed by the applicant for advance ruling is disposed off as withdrawn.
