Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : In re Haryana State Warehousing Corporation (GST AAAR Haryana)
Appeal Number : Appeal Case No. HAVAAAR/2019-20/01
Date of Judgement/Order : 07/08/2019
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

In re Haryana State Warehousing Corporation (GST AAAR Haryana)

The contention of the Appellant that all the services provided by the warehouse owner qualify as warehousing services is not tenable as the Appellant has tried to expand the scope of warehouse services as mentioned in entry 54 of the of the Notification No. 47/ST-2, dated 30th June, 2017 of the Haryana Government Excise and Taxation Department reproduced above. The argument of the appellant regarding storage and warehousing services explained in circular F.No. B/11/1/2002-TRU, dated 01.08.2002 issued by Central Government includes the lien and storage charges as contended by the Appellant, does not hold water at all.

Sub-section 4(1) of the Warehousing (Development and Regulation) Act, 2007 provides that any person desirous of commencing or carrying on the business of maintaining a warehouse issuing negotiable warehouse receipts may make an application to the Authority for registration in respect of one or more warehouses owned or occupied by him. Further, section 2(m) of the said act provides that “negotiable warehouse receipt” means a warehouse receipt under which the goods represented therein are deliverable to the depositor or order, the endorsement of which has the effect of transfer of goods represented thereby and the endorsee for which takes a good title. As per second proviso to section 3 of the said Act, no such registration shall be required for warehouses which do not propose to issue negotiable warehouse receipt.

Therefore, even if a warehouse operator is not issuing any negotiable warehouse receipts and is not registered under the Warehousing (Development and Regulation) Act, 2007, the other services provided by him (i.e. other than lien ‘or mortgage charges and stock transfer fees) shall qualify as warehousing services. Therefore, for any service to qualify as warehousing services it is not imperative that negotiable warehousing receipts must have been issued for them. Therefore, scope of storage or warehousing services cannot be expanded to unlimited extent. Only the services similar to the services mentioned in the entry can be construed as included therein.

From the above, it is clear that the lien or mortgage charges and stock transfer fees received by the applicant from the service receiver are taxable under Section 9 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Section 9 of Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and do not fall in exemption category as provided in entry no. 54 of the Notification dated 30th June, 2017 of the Haryana Government Excise and Taxation Department.

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
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031