9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 1856 - AAR - GSTScope of Advance Ruling - Liability of members of RWA are liable to pay GST - services received by them directly from the third party despite maintenance charges being less than ₹ 7,500/- per month - HELD THAT - The applications for the advance ruling should be directly related to applicant in respect of supply of goods or services. In the instant case applicant is a recipient of services and not the supplier of the said services, since the applicant has sought ruling which is directly related to supplier of services, their application do not fall under the ambit of Section 95(a) of the Act. The ruling cannot be given as the matter does not fall within the purview of Advance Ruling in term of Section 95(a) of CGST/SGST Act, 2017.
Issues:
Whether members of RWA are liable to pay GST on services received from a third party despite maintenance charges being less than ?7,500 per month. Analysis: The applicant, an unregistered person under GST, sought an advance ruling regarding the liability of RWA members to pay GST on services received directly from a third party, even if maintenance charges are below ?7,500 per month. The applicant submitted the application on 31-10-2018, and a personal hearing was conducted on 3-1-2019 where the authorized representatives reiterated the written submissions. The application was then forwarded to the Jurisdictional GST Officer for comments. Upon discussion and finding, it was observed that the applicant's query did not fall within the ambit of Section 95(a) of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017, which defines advance ruling as a decision provided to an applicant on matters related to the supply of goods or services undertaken by the applicant. Since the applicant was a recipient of services and not the supplier, the ruling sought was not directly related to the applicant in terms of supply of goods or services. Therefore, the application did not meet the criteria for an advance ruling as per the Act. Consequently, both members of the Authority for Advance Ruling unanimously ruled that the matter could not be considered for an advance ruling as it did not align with the definition of advance ruling under Section 95(a) of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017.
|
