Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + AAAR GST - 2021 (2) TMI AAAR This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 930 - AAAR - GSTApplicability of Transitional Provision under Section 142(11)(c), (Chapter XX) of TNGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017 for the remaining installments of “Mobilization Advance’, which transitioned into the GST regime and to be adjusted/ deducted by them post the implementation of GST (i.e. Post July 1, 2017) - Levy of GST - Input tax Credit (ITC) on Service Tax paid which was transferred from Pre-GST period through TRAN-1 Return filed in terms of the section 142(11)(c), under Transitional Provisions (Chapter XX) of both TNGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017. HELD THAT:- On the applicability of GST on the ‘Mobilization Advance’ which is transitioned to GST, the lower authority has ruled that ‘the transition provision applicable to the case at hand is as per Section 142(11)(b) of the act and Mobilisation advance to the extent received prior to the implementation of GST towards supply of Works Contract Service is not to be subjected to GST as per the provisions of Section 142(11)(b) of the GST Act 2017’. We find that the appellant seeks a clarification before us as to whether they are liable to pay GST on that portion of the ‘transitioned Mobilization advance’ on which Service Tax was not leviable/payable under the existing law or there is no GST liability on the entire ‘Mobilization advance’ received by them prior to the implementation of GST. Thus, we find that the issue to be decided is whether GST is payable on that portion of Mobilization advance transitioned into GST and on which no tax has been paid in the Pre-GST regime ‘Mobilisation Advance’ has been paid to the appellant by his service receiver against the ‘bank guarantee’ executed by the appellant for the entire amount. This shows that the amount received by the appellant is ‘consideration’ towards the supply to be made. It is also to be noted that the appellant holds the amount received as ‘advance’ and considers as payment towards supply only when he raises the RA bills against the supplies made by him to the receiver, i.e., his client. Further, the transition provision 142 (11) (b) considering such scenario provides for payment of GST on the consideration which has not suffered service tax under Chapter V of the Finance Act and the Non-obstante clause with regard to Section 13 in the said provision also points to the leviability/payment of GST on such consideration which has not suffered Service Tax in the Pre-GST regime - In the case of the appellant, on 01.07.2017, the advance amount received is accounted and maintained as ‘Advance’ and applying the provisions of Section 142(11)(b) of the Act, GST is liable to be paid on the said amount reduced by the Service Tax paid under Chapter V of the Finance Act 1994 on 01.07.2017. As per Section 101(3), there is no advance ruling issued on the Time of Supply’ of the Mobilization advance transitioned into GST, which has not suffered any tax in the Pre-GST regime and the applicability of Sec. 142(11)(b) to the facts of this case. Eligibility to credit based on the transitional provisions which has not been answered by the Lower Authority - Scope of Advance Ruling authority - HELD THAT:- The Authority is to rule only on the issues spelt in Section 97 (2) of the Act and only to those who are eligible to seek such ruling under Section 95 of the Act. The lower authority in Para 6 of the ruling, has considered all the three questions raised and found that the question relating to eligibility to credit under transitional provisions is not in the ambit of this authority, to which we do not see any reason to disagree. This authority can rule only on the questions within the scope of the authority. While we understand the appellant’s grievance of not answering all the questions raised by them in complete manner, we re-iterate that Advance Ruling Authority has their limits defined and could act only within its authority.
|