9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 1338 - AAR - GSTMaintainability of Advance Ruling Application - Calculation of GST - Whether tax is to be calculated on tender price or inclusive of tender price? - HELD THAT - It is found that vide the Tender to this work order, said work was to be completed within 9 months from the date of written order to commence. M/s Royal received the work order to commence on 1-12-20, thereby time limit of 9 month is completed on 1-9-21. M/s Royal has not brought on record that said Work order/ tender for which Ruling is sought, the Supply is being undertaken. It is noted that subject Advance Ruling application was filed on 20-1-22, thereby the said activity, as submitted by M/s Royal is neither an ongoing nor a proposed activity as on date of filing subject application. As per Section 95(a) CGST Act, Advance Ruling is a decision provided to an applicant in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. The Question raised by M/s Royal does not fall under the gamut of said Section 95(a) CGST Act. The subject Application is thereby non-maintainable as per Section 95(a) CGST Act and hereby rejected.
Issues:
- Calculation of tax on tender price or inclusive of tender price Analysis: - Facts: M/s Royal Techno Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. sought an advance ruling regarding the calculation of tax on a tender price that includes GST. - Question: The main issue was whether the tax should be calculated on the tender price or inclusive of the tender price. - Personal Hearing: A virtual hearing was held where the applicant representatives were present and asked to clarify the application and provide the tender document. - Revenue's Submission: The revenue authority did not submit any comments or appear for the hearing. - Findings: The authority found the application to be unclear and lacking essential details. M/s Royal submitted a work order for a road project but failed to demonstrate that the supply in question was ongoing or proposed at the time of filing the application. As per the CGST Act, an advance ruling pertains to goods or services being undertaken or proposed, which was not the case here. Therefore, the application was deemed non-maintainable and rejected as it did not meet the requirements of Section 95(a) of the CGST Act.
|
