Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + AAR GST - 2020 (9) TMI AAR This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 1166 - AAR - GSTRectification of Mistake - Mistake apparent on the face of record or not - Liability to pay Service Tax / GST proportionate to the services provided before / after 30.06.2017 respectively - section 161 of the CGST/KGST Act 2017 - it was held in the case of IN RE: M/S. DURGA PROJECTS AND INFRA STRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [2019 (8) TMI 395 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA] that the applicant is liable to pay GST towards work executed under Joint Development Agreement on Land Owner's portion, on the value to be arrived at in terms of para 2 of the Notification No.11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, at the time of transfer of possession of the land owner's portion of the flats and that the tax liability arises entirely under the GST Law since possession of land owner's share of flats has not been given to the land owner till the inception of GST Law. HELD THAT:- The applicant filed the instant application for ROM in the IN RE: M/S. DURGA PROJECTS AND INFRA STRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [2019 (8) TMI 395 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA], without bringing anything on record to negate the findings in the said order that the possession of land owner's share of flats was not handed over to the land owner till 30.06.2017. Further, the time of supply and point of taxation, for the purpose of valuation, are same in CGST Act 2017 (Notification No.04/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018) and Service Tax i.e. Finance Act 1994 (para 2.1 (B) (i) of Circular No.151/2/2012-ST dated 10.02.2012) i.e. liability shall arise at the time when the possession or right in the property of the said flats are transferred to the land owner by entering into a conveyance deed or similar instrument (eg. Allotment letter). It is clearly evident that the authority has considered all the submissions and issued proper orders. Hence there is no error / apparent mistake on the face of the record in the case of IN RE: M/S. DURGA PROJECTS AND INFRA STRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED. The applicant filed the instant application for ROM, under Section 161 of the CGST Act, 2017 whereas Section 102 of the CGST Act 2017 is the relevant one for filing the application for rectification of advance ruling - the instant application is not maintainable and is liable for rejection in terms of Section 98(2) of the CGST/KGST Act 2017 and hence the same is dismissed as inadmissible..
|