9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 934X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owever, the answer lies in the fact that the very nature of concessionaire agreement / bid with GCC involves supply of bins, construction of sheds, vehicles, mechanical sweepers, etc., along with other goods and services; therefore, the appellant who only won the bid and should have performed the activities directly to the GCC, floated two concessionaires who will procure the goods and supply to the appellant, who in turn will provide the services, so as to be termed to be pure services allegedly to enable them qualify themselves under the exemption notification. This artificial separation of activities to be performed wholly by the successful bidders and to be provided to the GCC, is a colourable device to avail the exemption under GST a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edit shall be made, unless the appellant has been given an opportunity of being heard. 2. Under Section 103(1) of the Act, this Advance ruling pronounced by the Appellate Authority under Chapter XVII of the Act shall be binding only (a). On the applicant who had sought it in respect of any matter referred to in sub-section (2) of Section 97 for advance ruling; (b). On the concerned officer or the jurisdictional officer in respect of the applicant. 3. Under Section 103 (2) of the Act, this advance ruling shall be binding unless the law, facts or circumstances supporting the said advance ruling have changed. 4. Under Section 104 (1) of the Act, where the Appellate Authority finds that advance ruling pronounce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gement to private sector entities as well as public sector entities and Governmental organizations. They have multistate presence in India in various States such as Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and New Delhi. On 10th March 2020, they have entered into two separate Service Agreements for supply of waste collection, segregation, treatment, transportation and disposal services for the Greater Chennai Corporation with following entities: (i) Sumeet Urban Services (Chennai) II Private Limited, Chennai (ii) Sumeet Urban Services (Chennai) V Private Limited, Chennai The services referred above commences effective April 2020. The Appellant has sought Advance Ruling on the followin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ices for the Greater Chennai Corporation with following entities: (i) Sumeet Urban Services (Chennai) II Private Limited, Chennai (ii) Sumeet Urban Services (Chennai) V Private Limited, Chennai The Municipal authority accepted the request of the bidder to accept the two SPV s as the concessionaries to undertake and perform obligations and exercise rights of the bidder under the LOA for undertaking the project and entered into Concession Agreement with the SPV s Zone-Wise separately on 24.02.2020. The Concessionaires proposed to outsource the part of the work and the Appellant inter alia engaged and experienced in the field of Waste Management, Mechanized Road Sweeping and other services relating to Integrated Facili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sonal hearing as required under law before this Appellate Authority on 5t1 February 2021. The Authorized representatives of the Appellant, M/s. Nithyaesh Vaibhav, Nithyaesh Natraj, Vaibhav R Venkatesh, Anirudh A Sriram, Mayan H Jain, Legal Representatives and Prabhakar Salunke, Ajit Darandale of the appellant company appeared for hearing. DISCUSSION FINDINGS: 6.1 We have carefully considered the various submissions made by the Appellant along with case laws and the applicable statutory provisions. We find that the submissions made by the appellant have already been looked into by the AAR and there is nothing new which has been brought to persuade the AAAR. The case laws and arguments pertaining to Service Tax law are specific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concessionaires reveals that the appellant does not render back to back services of what GCC awarded to the concessionaire and only carries out a part of the activities awarded to the concessionaire by the GCC. The original concessionaire agreement between GCC and the concessionaires, itself being not in the nature of pure services but a supply of both goods and services, how the services of appellant rendered to the concessionaire, with or without being back to back contract, can be termed as a pure service? 6.5 When the bid for services to GCC is directly with the appellant and the services are to be done by the appellant to GCC, why appellant entered into agreement with concessionaire, who has been promoted by the appellant itself, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
