Compiled by Sri. B.S.Seethapathi Rao, Tax Consultant, Kakinada.
Advertisements
| S. No. | Name of the Applicant | AR Order No & Date | Ruling in PDF | Category of Section under CGST Act | Questions on which Advance Rulings sought and Ruling given by the Authority. |
| 1 | Giriraj Renewables Private ltd., | KAR/ADRG/01/2018 dated 21-03-2018 | 97 (2)(e ) (g) | Q. a) Whether supply of turnkey Engineering, Procurement & Construction (‘EPC’) Contract for construction of solar power plant wherein both goods and services are supplied can be construed to be a Composite Supply in terms of Section 2(30) of CGST Act, 2017. Ruling : –The major component (PV Module) said to have been constituting TOV| of title whole project can not be construed to be supplied by the applicant consequent upon High Sea Sale of the said product and hence it cannot be construed to be a principal supply of the project and thereby cannot be a composite supply . Q. b).If Yes, Whether the Principal Supply in such case can be said to be ‘Solar Power Generating System’ which is taxable at 5% GST. Ruling: The question does not not remain relevant on account of answer to question number 1′ Q. c) Whether benefit of concessional rate of 5% of solar power generation system and parts thereof would also be available to sub-contractors. Supply in terms of Section 2(30) of CGST Act, 2017. Ruling: The supply made by sub contractor need to be viewed as an individual supply and thereby the appropriate rate of GST has to be applied depending on the specific nature of supply’ | |
| 2 | Gogte Infrastructure Development Corporation limited | KAR/ADRG/02/2018 dated 21-03-2018 | 97 (2) (a) (b) (c) (e ) | Q.a: Supply of Restaurant and lodging services to employees ,customers, visitors & guests of SEZ units in Karnataka. Ruling: The Hotel Accommodation & Restaurant services being provided by the Applicant, within the premises of the Hotel, to the employees & guests of SEZ units, car not be treated as supply of goods & services to SEZ units in Kamataka & hence the intra state supply and are taxable accordingly’. Q. b) “Exemption to SEZ units located in state of Karnataka. a) Section 7(5) (b) of the IGST Act :treats supply of Goods /Services to or by SEZ as a deemed Interstate supply b) Section 16(1) (b) of the IGST Act : defines the term “Zero rated Supplies ” to include Exports and supply of goods/Services to SEZ’s Ruling has given by the Authority as above. Q. c) & e)Whether the Hotel Accommodation & Restaurant services provided by them, within the premises of the Hotel, to the employees & guests of SEZ units, be treated as supply of goods & services to SEZ units in Karnataka or not ?” Ruling has given by the Authority as above. | |
| 3 | Skilltech Engineers & Contractors Private limited | KAR/ADRG/03/2018 dated 21-03-2018 | 97 (2)(a )(b) | Q.1:“Whether the contract, executed by them for KPTCL, is a divisible contract [Supply of goods & Supply of Services] or an indivisible contract [ works contract]?” Ruling: . The contract contract entered indivisible’ and squarely falls service. Q.2:“Whether the tax rate of 12% [CGST-6% + SGST-6%] is applicable to the above contract, in pursuance of Notification No.24/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 21.09.2017?” Ruling: The Applicant is not entitled for the benefit of concessional rate of GST @I2% in terms of Notification No.2412O17 -Central Tax (Rate) dated.21.09.2017. | |
| 4 | Tathagat Health Care Centre Llp | KAR/ADRG/04/2018 dated 21-03-2018 | 97(2) (e ) | Q:“Whether GST is leviable on the rent payable by a Hospital, catering life saving services?” Ruling: GST is leviable on the rent paid / payable for premises, taken on lease by the applicant. | |
| 5 | Sayre Therapeutics Private Limited | KAR/ADRG/05/2018 dated 21-03-2018 | 97 (2)(b)(e) | Q.a: Health care services provided by clinical establishments, an authorised medical practitioner or para-medics are exempted vide SL.No.74 of the Notification No. 12/ 2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28th June, 2017. Therefore the issue/s before us to decide are a. Whether the Applicant qualifies as clinical establishment? Ruling: The applicant qualifies to be a clinical establishment and the services offered/ provided by the applicant qualify to be Health Care Services. The intra-state supply of said services attract NIL rate of Central Tax as per Sl.no.74 of the N.NO .12/ 2017-Central Tax (Rate) dt.28.6.2017. b. Whether the services provided by the applicant qualifies to be health care services? Ruling has given by the Authority as above | |
| 6 | Rajashri Foods Pvt. ltd | KAR/ADRG/06/2018 dated 23-04-2018 | 97(2)(a)(b) | Q.1: “Whether the transaction would amount to supply of goods or supply of services or supply of goods & services?” Ruling: The transaction of transfer of business as a whole to one the units of the Applicant in the nature oi a going concern amounts to supply of Services. Q.2: “Whether the transaction would cover under sl.no.2 of the Notification No.12/2017 -Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017?” Ruling: The transaction of transfer of one of the units of the Applicant as a going concern is covered under sr.No.2 of the Notification No.12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dared 28.06.17 subject to the condition that the unit is a going concem. | |
| 7 | Manipal Academy for Higher Education, | KAR/ADRG/07/2018 dated 23-04-2018 | 97 (2) (e) | Q.i: Whether the amount recovered from post graduate course candidates as compensation on certain contingencies, is liable to GST in the hands of Manipal Academy of Higher Education? Ruling: The application filed by the applicant for Advance Ruling is dismissed as withdrawn ii. Whether the amount recovered from employees as notice pay recovery for not serving agreed notice period is liable for GST? Ruling has given by the Authority as above iii. Whether fees forfeited from students on discontinuing the course, before the term, is liable to GST? Ruling has given by the Authority as above | |
| 8 | Manipal Academy for Higher Education | KAR/ADRG/08/2018 dated 23-04-2018 | 97 (2) (g ) | Q: Whether collections made by the applicant under Manipal Arogya Suraksha Scheme from public on behalf of the insurance companies are liable to levy of tax considering the fact that the same are made merely as a collecting agent and the applicant is not engaged in provision of services ? Ruling: The application filed by the applicant for Advance Ruling is dismissed as withdrawn | |
Click here to get all AAR Karnataka
Share this content: