Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : In re Vinayaka Constructions (GST AAR Andhra Pradesh)
Appeal Number : Advance Ruling AAR No. 37/AP/GST/2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 12/12/2019
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

In re Vinayaka Constructions (GST AAR Andhra Pradesh)

In the instance case, the applicant is the supplier of works contract services and the goods and services received by him for construction of immovable property (other than Plant or machinery) are neither owned nor capitalized in his own account, but passed on to the contractee. Hence even as per the provision of Section 17(5) (d), the applicant does not fall under this ineligible category. Thus the restriction contained under clause c & d of sub section 17(5) is not

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Your email address will not be published.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
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
March 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31