9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 1203 - AAR - GSTExemption from GST - composite supply of goods and services - assigning/sub-letting the contracted work to a sub-contractor - composite supply of goods and services for the Central Government, State Government or Union Territory or Local Authority or a Government Authority or a Government Entity only - applicability of Clause 3A of the Notification No. 02/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018 - HELD THAT - On examination of the 'Notice Inviting Tender' (NIT NO. 30/2021-22) provided by the applicant, it is found that it was simply a tender document having general details of work description, estimated cost, earnest money, cost of tender document, tender processing fee, period for O M, important dates of events and eligibility /technical criteria. There is nowhere mention about scope of work to be done by the applicant. In the absence of clear scope of work to be performed by the applicant in the said project (i.e. 'Operation and Maintenance of Integrated Ramganjmandi Pachpahar Water Supply Project- Transmission Part), we are not in the position to ascertain whether the work to be awarded to the applicant by the principal contractor will be either wholly or partially or of goods service both or only goods or only service - in the absence of aforesaid information/ documents, we are not enough capable to examine whether the work to be allotted to the applicant will have all components of composite supply, works contract, immovable property etc. and will satisfy the elements of the Clause 3A of the Notification No. 02/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018. In the case at hand, the applicant had not furnished any documentary evidence to substantiate their proposed scope of work, mode of supply (i.e. whether supply of goods or service or both) in the form of any work Order, quantum of goods or service or both to be supplied or any documentary evidence to prove the proposed supply of the applicant, i.e., any correspondences with the proposed principal suppliers with whom they intend to enter into transactions or contract/agreements/Purchase orders for supply. In this situation, without the specifics of the proposed supply, substantiated with the material facts, this authority is constrained to not to rule on the applicability of 3A of the Notification No. 02/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018.
Issues Involved:
1. Classification of goods or services. 2. Determination of the liability to pay tax on goods or services. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Classification of Goods or Services: The applicant, M/s SKS Infra Projects, sought an advance ruling on whether the services provided by them as a sub-contractor to the principal contractor, who has been allotted a tender by the Government of Rajasthan, would attract the same 'nil' rate of tax under the GST regime as applicable to the principal contractor. The principal contractor's services involve a composite supply of goods and services, where the value of goods does not exceed 25% of the total value, thus attracting a 'nil' rate of tax as per Sr. no. 3A of Notification No. 02/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018. The applicant argued that since the sub-contractor performs the same functions and provides a composite supply of goods and services to the government entity, the same tax exemption should apply. 2. Determination of the Liability to Pay Tax: The applicant contended that the liability of the sub-contractor should mirror that of the principal contractor to avoid frustrating the government's intent behind providing tax exemptions. They emphasized that the sub-contractor's work, being part of the overall project for the government, should also be eligible for the same 'nil' rate of tax. Findings, Analysis & Conclusion: 1. The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) examined the facts and submissions, including the relevant provisions of the GST Act and Notification No. 02/2018-Central Tax (Rate). 2. The AAR noted that the applicant had only applied for a tender document and had not entered into any contract or agreement with the principal contractor by the date of the personal hearing. 3. The applicant provided a 'Notice Inviting Tender' (NIT) document, which lacked specific details about the scope of work to be performed by the applicant. This absence of clear scope made it difficult to ascertain whether the work would involve a composite supply, works contract, or immovable property. 4. The AAR highlighted that without concrete information or documents, it could not determine if the work to be awarded would meet the criteria of Clause 3A of the Notification No. 02/2018-Central Tax (Rate). 5. The applicant did not furnish any supporting documents to substantiate the exemption eligibility of the principal contractor or any documentary evidence of acceptance of the tender by the principal contractor. Furthermore, the name of the principal contractor was not provided. 6. Without documentary evidence to substantiate the proposed scope of work, mode of supply, or any contractual agreements, the AAR found it prudent to refrain from pronouncing a ruling. Ruling: No ruling was extended due to the lack of material evidence and specifics of the proposed supply, as stated in para 13 of the judgment.
|
