9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 405X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions: 1. The tax rate for providing service of Coastal and transoceanic water transport 2. Whether input Credit of Goods & Service can be claimed? At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to any dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provision under the MGST Act. Further to the earlier, henceforth for the purposes of this Advance Ruling, the expression `GST Act' would mean CGST Act and MGST Act. 2. FACTS AND CONTENTION - AS PER THE APPLICANT FACTS: Applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Charges were paid by them. Since this was an Indian Cabotage movement which comes under "Coastal Water Transport Service by bulk vessel" applicant raised an Invoice with 18% GST as per SAC code 996521. Applicant's client denied to pay the same as contested that the applicable GST rate is 5% instead of 18% for such services. 03. CONTENTION - AS PER THE CONCERNED OFFICER: The jurisdictional officer has not made any submissions in the matter. 04. HEARING 4.1 Preliminary e-hearing in the matter was held on 13.07,2021. Authorized representatives of the Applicant, Shri. Anthony Thomas, Shri. Chirag Darji, CA and Shri. Minesh Rathod were present. Jurisdictional officer Shri. Prakash Kumar, Superintendent, Division-V, Mumbai South was als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tead of 18% for such services. 5.4 From the submissions made by the applicant, we find that in respect of the impugned contract 26th Feb 2020, the applicant has already completed the activity of moving Iron ore pellets in bulk (qty: 63,250 mts) from Paradip Sea Port, East coast of India to Hazira Sea Port, West Coast of India, since the applicant has stated that Loading and Unloading is done by Party / Clients and also Port Charges were paid by them. Further, the applicant has submitted that, it raised an Invoice with 18% GST on M/s Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd and therefore as per our understanding, the supply has already been completed well before the date of submission of the subject application seeking the ruling. 5.5 This au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is in relation a supply which has already been rendered before the date of filing of the subject application. Thus, the condition under Section 95 is not satisfied by the applicant and hence, the issue cannot be decided by this authority and therefore, the subject application is held to be non-maintainable. Hence, we do not discuss the merits of the case. 5.9 Further, during the course of the final e-hearing held on 28.12.2021, the Authorized representatives of the applicant, were requested to produce relevant records, details, vouchers of sale-purchase & correspondence, agreements or other proof in support of contentions made, to explain tax treatment being adopted by applicant at present and to make submissions. However, the applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
