place of supply, Goods and Services Tax - GST

[mahima arora]

ONE PARTY IS PROVIDING CRANE SERVICE SUPPLIER IS REGISTRED IN HARYANA AND RECIPENT IS REGISTERED IN MAHARASTRA AND THE SERVICE PROVIDIDE AT HARYANA THEN WHAT WILL APPLICABLE IGST OR CGST AND SGST

SEC 12 OF IGST WHICH CLAUSE IS APPLICABLE IN THIS SITUATION

Posts / Replies

[KASTURI SETHI]

IGST is applicable.

[Shilpi Jain]

What is the reason that the service recipient of Haryana is taking a crane from Maharashtra?

Is the work undertaken in MH by a person having registration in Haryana?

Further facts needed, what is the nature of service to check if it is a service relating to immovable property and thereby tax type may change.

[Amit Agrawal]

More facts & clarity needed. Sub-section (3) of Section 12 of the IGST Act, 2017 might come into play.

It is also possible the service-recipient (in given situation) is liable to get itself registered in Haryana but avoiding the same.

So, before deciding to charge IGST or CGST & SGST, one needs to take into account many factual situation & applicable legal provisions.

These are ex facie views of mine and the same should not be construed as professional advice / suggestion.

[mahima arora]

recipient has a civil work contract in haryana ( party is not registerd in haryana) , recipent asked bill with maharastra gstn and palce of supply in maharstra so as they can claim itc. but the confusion is about place of supply

[Amit Agrawal]

Assuming that you are referring to 'construction of immovable property' and services of crane services being ancillary to those activities, Section 12 (3) of the IGST Act, 2017 is applicable.

And Place of supply is the location of the immovable property (i.e. Haryana). Hence, supplier of crane-services needs to charge CGST & SGST (& NOT IGST) against given supply.

This legal position can not change just because recipient has not taken registration in Haryana (though, he is most likely, liable to take that registration).

These are ex facie views of mine and the same should not be construed as professional advice / suggestion.

[mahima arora]

THANKS FOR YOUR OPINION

[Alkesh Jani]

Shri/Ku.

In this regards, I agree with the views of Shri Kasturiji Sir, that IGST is applicable.

Thanks

[Amit Agrawal]

Dear Shri Alkesh Ji,

Request you to kindly elaborate your views please

[Alkesh Jani]

Shri Amitji & Querist,

At the very outset, supply of crane is supply of service of tangible goods. Supplier of Service is in Haryana and Services will be supplied to person registered in Maharashtra, although services are consumed in Haryana, the supply of service is neither event based or performance based.

Section 12 (2) (a) of IGST Act, 2017 will be applicable.

If doubt persist, one can opt for Advance Ruling.

Thanks

[Amit Agrawal]

Thanks Shri Alkesh Ji for your elaboration!

In view of my understanding of factual position read with Section 12 (3) of the IGST Act, 2017, as spelt in my post at serial no. 5 above, I most respectfully cannot agree with your views.

These are ex facie views of mine and the same should not be construed as professional advice / suggestion. I respect contrary views.

[Padmanathan Kollengode]

Dear Alkesh Ji,

Pls note that AAR is not competent to decide Place of Supply for the want of jurisdiction.

[Padmanathan Kollengode]

Dear Querist,

In my opinion the said service of providing crane is ancilliary for construction of immovable property and POS will be Haryana as per Sec 12(3)(d) of IGST Act, 2017. hence, it will be subject to CGST & SGST.

[Alkesh Jani]

Shri Padmanathan Kollengode Ji,

With regard to your reply No.11, Please refer judgement of High Court of Kerala in case of SUTHERLAND MORTGAGE SERVICES INC Vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER 2020 (3) TMI 186 - KERALA HIGH COURT based on this Rulings are available.

Thanks

[Padmanathan Kollengode]

Alkesh Sir,

With respect to Sutherlands decision of Kerala High Court in 2020 (3) TMI 186 - KERALA HIGH COURT, the court has held that the question sought by the petitioner had bearing on larger question of "determination of liability to pay tax on goods or services or both" and for that purpose, remitted the matter back to AAR for fresh consideration. In my considerate opinion, it does not mean AAR has jurisdiction to rule on POS.

In the present issue, the question does not have any bearing on determination of liability to pay tax.

[Alkesh Jani]

Shri Padmanathan Kollengode Ji,

Our expert Shri M. GOVINDARAJAN Ji has written an article on this, link is given below. To be proud of he is also an Expert in our forum. Let us seek guidance from him and request him to comment in the matter for larger public interest.

https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_article.asp?ArticleID=8986