Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Discussions Forum
Home Forum Goods and Services Tax - GST This
A Public Forum.
Anyone can participate to share knowledge.
We acknowledge the contributions of Experts/ Authors.

Submit new Issue / Query

Place of Supply for Interior Works, Goods and Services Tax - GST

Issue Id: - 118909
Dated: 18-12-2023
By:- MOODUKONAJE HARISH

Place of Supply for Interior Works


  • Contents

Dear All, a registered dealer in Bangalore provides interior work services to an immovable property in Mumbai. The service recipient is also registered in Mumbai. The work includes interior services for a showroom, it includes POP, wooden works, lights, wirings, etc. It is a composite supply. He purchases all the materials in Mumbai & gets IGST bill. He claims ITC on the same & raises IGST bill at 18% to the customer in Mumbai.

Query :

1. Do The above services comes under SAC 998391 or it will be considered as work contract under SAC 9954.

2. Do the service provider needs to take separate registration in Mumbai & raise a C/SGST invoice or he can raise a IGST bill from Bangalore.

Pls advice.

Post Reply

Posts / Replies

Showing Replies 1 to 8 of 8 Records

Page: 1


1 Dated: 19-12-2023
By:- GUNASEKARAN K

Dear Moodukonjaje Harish,

1. The relevant SAC is 998391

2. The service provider no need to take GST registration at Maharashtra & he can raise the tax invoice with IGST at 18% for his interior service.


2 Dated: 19-12-2023
By:- DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN

The service provider need not take registration at Mumbai.


3 Dated: 20-12-2023
By:- KASTURI SETHI

In my opinion, SAC is 9954, it being a composite supply. Regarding place of supply, I agree with both experts.


4 Dated: 20-12-2023
By:- MOODUKONAJE HARISH

Thank you all for your valuable advice.


5 Dated: 20-12-2023
By:- Amit Agrawal

Dear Querist,

A. Heading '998391' is for 'Specialty design services including interior design, fashion design, industrial design and other specialty design services' whereas subject register's services are 'actual execution using material & labor'. And hence, subject services would fall under Section 9954.

B. So as to answer your second question, it is my presumptive understanding that services provided by the tax-payer falls under works-contract as defined u/s 2(119) of the CGST Act, 2017.

B. Here, I hold a view that such tax-payer is also compulsorily liable to take registration in Mumbai (Maharashtra) under GST.

B2. For reasons behind my view about mandatory requirement of taking registration at Mumbai (the actual site of work) in situation under discussion here, one may look into my multiple posts under Issue-ID: 118425 bearing subject-line as 'place of supply, Goods and Services Tax - GST'

B3. I am aware that many of such type of tax-payers avoid taking such registration in other states. But, avoiding such registration in other states (where actual site of work lies) can be risky & litigation-prone from multiple angles in my humble view.

C. If subject tax-payer is in-turn receiving services from local vendors from Mumbai / Maharashtra where place of supply is 'Mumbai / Maharashtra' (& not Bangalore / Karnataka) because of certain situations covered under Section 12 of the IGST Act, 2017 (For example: situations falling sub-section (3)) and based on my professional experience, this happens very often in these line of businesses, not taking registration at Mumbai will also result into loss of ITC for such tax-payers.

D. From the legal requirements as explained in Para B above & business requirement as explained in Para C above, it is better to take registration in other states (where actual site of work lies) in this line of business.

D1. Compliance costs of additional registration/s are far less that 'risk, litigation-costs and loss/es in ITC' in my humble view.

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


6 Dated: 21-12-2023
By:- Amit Agrawal

In above post of mine, please read Para D1 as follows: Compliance costs of additional registration/s are far less that 'risk, litigation-costs and loss/es in ITC if such such additional registrations are not taken', in my humble view.


7 Dated: 21-12-2023
By:- Shilpi Jain

HSN 9954

Since supply made at site a view emanates that registration required. However, if it can be shown that the work cannot be independently carried out at site but requires support from the HO/main office in the other State, coupled with the fact that there is no fixed establishment in the other State, no new registration would be required.

Another option is to see if casual taxable person registration can be taken if the work is for short period of time.

Not taking registration would at the max only be a procedural non-compliance and should not lead to heavy demand from department, even if the department considers that new registration is a requirement to be fulfilled.


8 Dated: 21-12-2023
By:- MOODUKONAJE HARISH

Thank you, for your valuable advice.


Page: 1

Post Reply

Quick Updates:Latest Updates