9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n set up under the Nirma University Act, i.e. an Act of the Gujarat Legislature, therefore it falls under item (i) of the definition of Governmental Authority . However, the appellant has not claimed to be satisfying the condition of 90 per cent or more participation by way of equity or control. The Nirma University Act contains provisions relating to Funds of University in section 24 and provisions relating to composition of Board of Governors in section 10, which also do not indicate that the appellant is satisfying the condition 90 per cent or more participation by way of equity or control - thus, the appellant Nirma University cannot be termed as Governmental Authority within the definition of the said expression under clause (zf) of para 2 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax. Nirma University is not eligible for claiming benefit of Sr. No. 45 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended and Notification No. 12/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 30.06.2017, as amended - Services provided by Nirma University are not exempted under Sr. No. 4 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended and Notification No. 12/2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted that since item (i) of the said definition is separated from item (ii) by a semi colon (;), the condition prescribed below said item (ii) is not applicable to item (i). The appellant has relied upon the judgement in the case of Rajinder Singh V/s Kultar Singh of the Hon ble High Court of Panjab and Haryana [AIR 1980 P H 1: ILR (1979) 2 P H 486(FB)] and the judgement in the case of Shapoorji Paloonji Company Ltd. V/s CCE, Patna [2016-TIOL-556-HC-PATNA-ST] 4.2 The appellant has also referred to entry 13 of the Twelfth Schedule read with Article 243W of the Constitution of India. The said entry 13 covers promotion of cultural, educational and aesthetic aspects . The appellant has submitted that the educational activities is very well covered in the said entry and there is no distinction provided for primary or higher education; that the entry is vast enough to cover all types of education and allied activities pertaining to cause of education. The appellant has relied upon the judgements in the case of State Waqf Board V/s Abdul Azeer Sahib [AIR 1968 Mad 79] and Doypack Systems (P) Ltd V/s UOI [1988 (36) E.T.T. 201 (S.C.)]. FINDINGS :- 5. We have considere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te) dated 26.07.2018. 6.2 As per clause (zf) of para 2 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), governmental authority has the same meaning as assigned to it in the Explanation to clause (16) of section 2 of the IGST Act, 2017. The said Explanation reads as follows :- Explanation . - For the purposes of this clause, the expression governmental authority means an authority or a board or any other body, - (i) set up by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature; or (ii) established by any Government, with ninety per cent. or more participation by way of equity or control, to carry out any function entrusted [to a Panchayat under Article 243G or] to a municipality under article 243W of the Constitution; 6.3 The said clause (zf) of para 2 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) was substituted vide Notification No. 32/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 13.10.2017 as follows :- (zf) Governmental Authority means an authority or a board or any other body, - (i) set up by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature; or (ii) established by any Government, with 90 per cent. or more participation by way of equity or control, to carry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said judgement of the Hon ble High Court of Patna in the case of Shapoorji Paloonji Company Pvt. Ltd. is in jeopardy, in view of the judgement of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. [2004 (164) E.L.T. 375 (S.C.)], wherein it has been held as under 14. Article 136 of the Constitution of India confers a special power upon this Court in terms whereof an appeal shall lie against any order passed by a Court or Tribunal. Once a Special Leave is granted and the appeal is admitted the correctness or otherwise of the judgment of the Tribunal becomes wide open. In such an appeal, the court is entitled to go into both questions of fact as well as law. In such an event the correctness of the judgment is in jeopardy. .. . 38. In the aforementioned cases, this Court failed to take into consideration that once an appeal is filed before this Court and the same is entertained, the judgment of the High Court or the Tribunal is in jeopardy. The subject matter of the lis unless determined by the last Court, cannot be said to have attained finality. Grant of stay of operation of the judgment may not be of much relevan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice not for making meaning, but for making meaning plain, its purpose, as Bouvier said, is to denote the stops that ought to be made in oral reading, and to point out the sense. Drafters are instructed that they should on no account, allow the meaning to turn, on the presence or absense of a punctuation mark. The good drafter consciously drafts every clause with an eye to what its sense would be if all such marks were removed. 30. Crawford in his book on Statutory construction says that when a statute is careful by punctuation, there is no doubt as its meaning, weight should undoubtedly be given to punctuation. Punctuation, therefore, certainly has its uses, but tendency of courts is not to allow it to control the plain meaning of a text, this is because the draftsman very often does use punctuation marks properly. 31. The Supreme Court in the case of Aswinikumar Ghose v. Arbinda Bose, has observed, that it need not be denied that punctuation may have its uses in some cases, but it cannot certainly be regarded as a controlling element and cannot be allowed to control the plain meaning of a text. 32. The use and purpose of using a' semi-colon' in a statute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to accept for more than one reason. Firstly, the punctuation markes used in a fiscal legislation need not be given more weight as explained by Apex Court in Arbinda Bose's case and secondly, even if the draftsman has used the semi-colon in between Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 7 of the Act, it would not imply the complete break of sentence and it makes a partial break and at the same time a link between sentences appearing on the same subject. . 9.1 Now coming back to the definition of Governmental Authority given at clause (zf) of Para 2 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), there is a long line after the words Governmental Authority means an authority or a board or any other body , which, in our view, is applicable to both the items (i) and (ii) and therefore the conditions of 90 per cent or more participation by way of equity or control and to carry out any function entrusted to a Municipality under Article 243W of the Constitution or to a Panchayat under Article 243G of the Constitution, are applicable to both the items (i) and (ii) of the definition of Governmental Authority . 9.2 In this regard, we draw support from the aforesaid judg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... function would only be liable to deduct tax at source. 3. In other words, the provisions of Section 51 of the CGST Act, are applicable to only such authority or board or any other body whether set up by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature or established by any Government in which fifty one percent or more participation by way of equity or control, is with the Government. 9.3.3 The aforesaid clarification issued by the CBIC is equally applicable to the interpretation of the clause (zf) of para 2 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) on the principle of contemporaneaexpositio . In the case of Ajay Gandhi Versus B. Singh [Transferred Case (C) No. 5 of 1997 with T.C. No. 6 of 1997 reported at 2004 (167) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.)], Hon ble Supreme Court has observed as follows :- 17. In Francis Bennion Statutory Interpretation, Fourth Edition, the law is stated in the following terms at page 596 : Section 231. The basic rule. - In the period immediately following its enactment, the history of how an enactment is understood forms part of the contemporaneaexpositio, and may be held to throw light on the legislative intention. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observations of this Court in K.P. Varghese v. The Income Tax Officer, Ernakulam (1982) 1 SCR 629. It is a well settled principle of interpretation that courts in construing a Statute will give much weight to the interpretation put upon it at the time of its enactment and since, by those whose duty has been to construe, execute and apply the same enactment [See also in Karnataka SSIDCL v. CIT (2002) Supp 4 SCR 453, 460.] 9.3.4 Thus, it supports our view that the condition mentioned below item (ii) of clause (zf) of para 2 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) are applicable to both the items (i) and (ii) of the said clause. 9.4 We may look this aspect from another angle also. Had it been the intention of the legislature to make the conditions below item (ii) applicable only to item (ii) and not to item (i), then such conditions could have been written alongwith item (ii) and there was no need to write such conditions separately below item (ii). 9.5 We, therefore hold that the condition that an authority / board / other body, to be qualified as Governmental Authority should have been set up or established with 90 per cent, or more participation by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent, State Government, Union Territory or local authority. We have already held that the appellant is not a Governmental Authority . The appellant has not claimed it to be Government entity . The definition of Government entity at clause (zfa) of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax also provides condition of 90 per cent or more participation by way of equity or control, which the appellant does not satisfy. Therefore, we hold that the exemption provided vide Sr. No. 45 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) is not admissible to the appellant. 13. We, therefore, reject the appeal filed by the appellant and confirm the Advance Ruling No. GUJ/GAAR/R/38/2020 dated 03.07.2020 issued by the GAAR, to the extent it has been appealed before us, by holding that (i) Nirma University is not eligible for claiming benefit of Sr. No. 45 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended and Notification No. 12/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 30.06.2017, as amended. (ii) Services provided by Nirma University are not exempted under Sr. No. 4 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, as amended and Notification No. 12/2017-St ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
