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 - 2023 (1) TMI AAR This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2023 (1) TMI 577 - AAR - GST


Issues Involved:
1. Classification of goods or services.
2. Admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Goods or Services:
The applicant, a chain of restaurants, sought clarification on whether the supply of food and beverages through dine-in, take-away, and delivery should be treated as a supply of goods or services. The applicant argued that their services fall under "restaurant service" as per Entry 6(b) of Schedule II and should be treated as supplies of services. They referenced Notification No. 11/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) and Circular No. 164/20/2021-GST, which clarified that services provided by cloud kitchens/central kitchens are covered under "restaurant service" and attract 5% GST without ITC.

2. Admissibility of Input Tax Credit (ITC):
The applicant inquired whether ITC would be available if the supply is treated as a supply of goods or services. The jurisdictional officer commented that the supply of food by the entity, whether partially or completely cooked in the central kitchen, through various eating joints, would be covered by 'restaurant service' and classifiable under HSN 9963. This classification attracts a tax rate of 5% (without ITC) as per Notification No. 11/2017-CT (Rate).

Findings, Analysis & Conclusion:

1. The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) examined the records and submissions. The applicant's question of law was whether the supply of food and beverages should be treated as a supply of goods or services and the applicable tax rate.

2. The AAR noted that the applicant's application for advance ruling was filed on 17.03.2022, while the supply, payment of GST, and submission of GST returns had already been taking place. The AAR emphasized that advance rulings are meant to provide certainty on tax liability in advance for future activities, not for transactions where GST is already being paid.

3. The AAR highlighted that the purpose of advance rulings is to provide clarity on tax liability for proposed transactions and help in planning GST liability. Since the applicant was already discharging GST liability as per existing notifications and circulars, the application was beyond the purview of advance ruling.

4. The AAR concluded that the applicant's intention was to validate the mechanism opted for GST payment, which is against the spirit of advance ruling.

Ruling:
The application for advance ruling was deemed not maintainable and was rejected under the provisions of the GST Act, 2017, as it pertained to transactions where GST was already being paid and returns were submitted.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates