9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 635X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ruling, the expression 'GST Act' would be a common reference to both CGST Act and TGST Act. 3. It is observed that the query raised by the applicant falls within the ambit of Section 97(2)(e) of the GST ACT read with 20(xviii) of the IGST Act, 2017. The Applicant enclosed copies of challans as proof of payment of Rs. 5,000/- for SGST and Rs. 5,000/- for CGST towards the fee for Advance Ruling. The Applicant has declared that the questions raised in the application have neither been decided by nor are pending before any authority under any provisions of the GST Act. The application is therefore, admitted. 4. Facts of the Case: The applicant M/s. Continental Engineering Corporation has executed works contract for M/s. Hyderabad Growth Corridor Ltd (HGCL). The work was completed in pre-GST era and the applicant raised certain claims regarding compensation for delay in execution, payment of difference in rates and other contractual breaches which was referred to a dispute resolution board on 1606-2017. The applicant after notifying to contractee on 25.09.2017, approached an arbitration tribunal which initiated proceedings on 20.11.2017 and passed an order on 09.05.2019 for Rs. 169,5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r what HSN Code and GST rate the liability is to be discharged by the applicant? 6. Grounds submitted & Personal Hearing: The applicant M/s. Continental Engineering Corporation has filed an application for clarification before Authority for Advance Ruling on 24-08-2020 manually. After receipt of the application, the concerned Jurisdictional Authority i.e. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Rajendranagar-I Circle was asked to inform if any similar issue is pending before him that were raised by the applicant M/s. Continental Engineering Corporation. In the meanwhile due to the COVID-19 pandemic, personal hearings could not be issued. However, Government of India, CBIC have issued certain instructions on 21-08-2020 to takeup Personal Hearings through virtual method. Hence, the Authority for Advance Ruling has decided to takeup personal hearings through virtual method. In the mean time, the Jurisdictional Authority was once again reminded on 25-11-2020 to submit the information whether any issued raises by applicant are pending before him. However, the Jurisdictional Authority has submitted his reply on 03-02-2021 (through mail) duly informing that there were no such issues are pending ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The applicant therefore concluded his arguments by asserting that the amount received on arbitration for execution of work in pre-GST period cannot be taxed under CGST / SGST Act. The applicant relied on catena of case law to assert that receipt of money cannot be considered as taxable event as the entire work was completed in the Pre-GST regime and only money is receivable in the GST regime. These case laws include: i. Commissioner of C.Ex & Cus, Vadodara Vs. Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd., 2009 (14) STR 146 (Guj). ii. Sudesh Sharma Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2010 (19) STR 512 (Tri- Dl). iii. Commissioner of Service Tax Vs. Consulting Engineering Services (I) P. Ltd., 2013 (30) STR 586. iv. Vistar Construction (P) Ltd., Vs. Union of India (2013) 30 Taxman.Com 269 Delhi. The applicant further stated that there is no man power and operation after the GST as seen from the financial statements. 7. Discussion & Findings: We have considered the submissions made by the applicant in their application for advance ruling as well as the submissions made during the personal hearing by Sri. Rajat Mohan, CA & AR and Smt. Priyanka Sachdeva, CA & AR during the personal hearing. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aining to the works executed earlier to introduction of GST are not taxable under CGST/SGST Acts. 2. Refund of excess deductions made: The refund of excess deductions both statutory and non-statutory made against the bills raised for the works completed in pre-GST period do not constitute consideration for supplies made under GST period. Therefore these amounts are not taxable under CGST/SGST Acts. 3. Interest on delayed payments of interim payment certificates: As seen from the averments of the applicant the interest is claimed on delayed payments on the works executed and payment certificates received in pre-GST period. In light of Section 13(2) of the CSGT Act the time of supply is not in GST period, hence these amounts are not liable to tax under CGST/SGST Acts. 4. Cost of Arbitration: The consideration received by arbitral tribunal is taxable on reverse charge basis under CGST & SGST Act @9% each. The service tariff code is 998215. In the present case, Arbitration as service was supplied independently after the introduction of GST i.e., the tribunal was constituted conclusively on 20.11.2017 and rendered its orders on 09.05.2019 and therefore this supply is liable to ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
