9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. (hereinafter referred to as the "Appellant") against the Advance Ruling No. HAR/HAAR/R/2018-19/17 dated 09.10.2018. A copy of order dated 09.10.2018 of the Advance Ruling Authority was received by the appellant on 04.09.2019 and the appeal has been filed on 01.10.2019 which is within time. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE: The Facts of the case, as available from 'Facts and Issues of Ruling' in the Appeal submitted vide FORM 'GST ARA-02' by the Applicant M/s BMW India Pvt. Ltd. Gurugram, which is registered in GST at Gurugram as a State administered taxpayer for running a training centre for the training of Engineers and Marketing professionals etc. They get BMW branded vehicles made in Chennai plant as inter-state stock transf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... supply at concessional rate as applicable on the old and used Motor Vehicles under the Notification. The exemption viz. the reduced rate of 18% (instead of normal 28%) is admissible if the ITC is not availed. Presently the Taxpayer is not availing ITC on the vehicles used by Visitors and Employees. QUESTION on which Advance Ruling was requested by the Appellant: "Whether the Applicant unit is entitled to avail Input Tax Credit (ITC) of IGST and Compensation Cess paid on receipt of cars (on stock transfer basis) for use in relation to specified business activities and thereafter onwards supply to dealers after use by the Applicant unit for a limited period of time?" RULING by Advance Ruling Authority (AAR): The Advance Ruling Authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17(5) of the HGST/ CGST Act 2017 starts with a non-obstante clause, as per the law the admissibility of Input Tax Credit on motor vehicles in the present case shall be as per the provisions contained therein." GROUNDS of APPEAL: In their support, the applicant submitted the following as GROUNDS OF APPEAL: * The Ruling is not in sync with the Rulings passed by other. Advance Ruling Authorities that input tax credit would be admissible; * The AAR has not considered the submissions; * The Ruling is vague/cryptic; * They are entitled to take Input Tax Credit (ITC) as the vehicles were further used for specified taxable supply mentioned Under Section 17(5)(a)(i)(A); * That, vehicles were always intended to be further supply by the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods used or intended to be used by a supplier in the course or furtherance of business". The Capital Goods have been defined under the Act in Section 2(19) as, "Capital goods" means goods, the value of which is capitalized in the books of account of the person claiming the input tax credit and which are used or intended to be used in the course or furtherance of business". The Appellant has submitted that they are capitalizing the Motor Vehicles subjected to the mentioned usage. Thus, apparently ITC should be admissible on these vehicles, as 'capital goods'. Section 16 of CGST act provides that a recipient Taxpayer is entitled to take the ITC if it has in possession, the duly issued invoices and the goods or services have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icles; or * transportation of passengers', or . * imparting training on driving such motor vehicles. As mentioned supra, the BMW Vehicles in respect of which the Question about admissibility of ITC has been raised for Advance Ruling, have been used for the following purposes: 'Training fleet' : Vehicles for training of Dealers and Authorized Service Centre operators; 'Press fleet' : Vehicles provided to media houses/ senior journalists for test purpose; 'Marketing fleet' : Vehicles for undertaking various marketing and promotional activities such as road shows, exhibitions etc. 'Sales fleet' : Vehicles assigned to corporate sales team for giving it to customers for test drive and product expe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
