9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 808 - AAR - GSTMaintainability of Advance Ruling application - Exemption from GST - supply of craftsman and other manpower service to M/s. Karnataka Institute of Leather Technology (State Government Organisation under Department of Industries and Commerce approved by AICTE DTE), GOK, under contractual agreement - Eligibility from exemption as envisaged under Sl.No.72 of the Notification No.12/ 2017-CT(R) dated 28-06-2017 for CGST - HELD THAT - The instant application has been filed online on 23.05.2022 and the question raised therein is about the applicability of GST on supply of manpower service to M/s. Karnataka Institute of Leather Technology. The notice U/s 73 of KGST and CGST Act, 2017 issued by concerned authorities, also pertains to the applicability of GST supply of manpower service to M/s. Karnataka Institute of Leather Technology. The issues raised in the instant application and the issues mentioned in the notice mentioned are one and the same i.e applicability of GST on supply of manpower service to M/s. Karnataka Institute of Leather Technology. Thus first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST Act 2017 is squarely applicable to the instant case, as all the conditions therein are fulfilled. The application is rejected as inadmissible , in terms of first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Issues involved:
Admissibility of the application for advance ruling under Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. Analysis: The applicant, a Proprietary concern providing manpower services to government departments, sought an advance ruling on the exemption eligibility for supplying craftsman and other manpower services to a State Government organization, M/s. Karnataka Institute of Leather Technology. The applicant claimed exemption under Sl.No.72 of Notification No.12/2017-CT(R) dated 28-06-2017 for CGST. An audit report followed by a notice under Section 73 of KGST and CGST Act, 2017 was issued, questioning the claimed exemption. During the personal hearing, the applicant reiterated the facts presented in the application. The Authority for Advance Rulings, Karnataka considered the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and the KGST Act, 2017 to be similar, differing only on specific provisions. The Authority reviewed the applicant's submission, the issues raised, and the relevant facts and arguments. The key issue was the admissibility of the application, governed by the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. This proviso states that the Authority shall not admit an application if the question raised is already pending or decided in any proceedings concerning the applicant under the Act. Upon examination, it was found that the application, filed online, and the notice issued by the authorities both pertained to the applicability of GST on the supply of manpower services to M/s. Karnataka Institute of Leather Technology. As the issues raised in the application and the notice were the same, meeting the conditions of the proviso, the application was deemed inadmissible. Therefore, the Authority rejected the application as "inadmissible" in accordance with the first proviso to Section 98(2) of the CGST Act, 2017.
|
