Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + AAR GST - 2021 (1) TMI AAR This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2021 (1) TMI 565 - AAR - GST


Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of GST on consultancy services rendered to Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Limited (SSNNL).
2. Exemption status and applicable GST rate for sub-consultants if consultancy services are exempted from GST.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Applicability of GST on Consultancy Services to SSNNL
The applicant, M/s. Poseidon Hydro Infratech, provides consultancy services and has been subcontracted by WAPCOS Ltd. to perform services for SSNNL. The main consultant, WAPCOS, has a clause in its agreement with SSNNL stating, "GST at prevailing rates shall be paid extra by the Client." However, SSNNL has not been paying GST, citing that the consultancy services provided by WAPCOS do not attract GST. The applicant has been paying GST to the government but has not been reimbursed by WAPCOS due to SSNNL's stance.

The applicant sought clarification on whether GST is applicable to consultancy services rendered to SSNNL. The relevant legal provisions under Section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017, which govern the applicability of GST and the conditions for seeking an advance ruling, were examined. The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) noted that the question posed by the applicant pertained to third-party transactions (between SSNNL and other consultancy agencies) and not directly to the services provided by the applicant.

Issue 2: Exemption Status and Applicable GST Rate for Sub-Consultants
The second question sought clarity on whether sub-consultants are exempt from GST if the main consultancy services are exempt. The AAR found this question to be hypothetical and speculative, as it was contingent on the resolution of the first issue. Since the first issue was deemed irrelevant to the applicant's direct services, the second question was also considered irrelevant.

Conclusion:
The AAR concluded that it could not provide a decision on either question due to the hypothetical nature of the queries and their irrelevance to the applicant's direct services. The ruling emphasized that the purpose of seeking an advance ruling is to clarify issues directly related to the applicant's activities and not third-party transactions. As a result, no decision was given on the applicability of GST to consultancy services rendered to SSNNL or the exemption status and applicable GST rate for sub-consultants.

Ruling:
1. Question-1: No decision can be given regarding the applicability of GST on consultancy services rendered to SSNNL.
2. Question-2: No decision can be given regarding the exemption status and applicable GST rate for sub-consultants.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates