Case Law Details
Case Name : In re Prodip Nandi (GST AAR West Bengal)
Related Assessment Year :
Courts :
AAR West Bangal Advance Rulings
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
In re Prodip Nandi (GST AAR West Bengal)
Manpower Agency cannot escape GST liability on Gross amount by showing Services Charges and Salary/Wages Separately
The applicant thus engages contract labour towards supply of manpower services as requited by his clients (recipient of services). Rule 33 of the CGST/WBGST Rules, 2017 clearly speaks that one of the conditions that has to be satisfied for exclusion of expenditure or costs from the value of supply which has been incurred by a supplier as a pure agent if the services procured by the service provider, as a pure agent of the recipient of serv...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.
One Comment
Cancel reply
The applicant has applied all efforts to substantiate himself as pure agent.
Infact most of the clients who are employing manpower are getting GST ITC. So doesn’t make much difference for them
However the manpower supplier has very little scope of claiming GST ITC. Nevertheless he is recovering GST amount from his clients.
So basically a zero sum game.