TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... site where the same is to be installed. Rather whatever structure or item is brought to the site wouldn’t serve any purpose unless the same is fitted, commissioned and made working. And for this, several activities are needed to be carried out at the site. The site would, of course, be an immovable property such as a building. Or it could be a standalone structure for car parking. Whatever be it, the system is to be aligned to the immovable structure by way of support system. It is not the case that in case it is desired to do away with it, one can remove the system and put it into place AS IT IS at another location. The removal would always involve a total dismantling which cannot be without loss or damage. Bombay High Court in the case of M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS BHARTI TELE-VENTURES LTD.) VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [2014 (9) TMI 38 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] in relattion to tower parts, green shelter, printers and office chairs, have held that the product cannot be shifted without damage. Apart from that various items and components are embedded in the earth. The product,therefore, is immovable. Thus, it is concluded that The impugned car par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thus - STATEMENT OF THE RELEVANT FACTS HAVING A BEARING ON THE OUESTION(S) ON WHICH THE, ADVANCE RULING IS REQUIRED 1. This Application is being preferred by Precision Automation Robotics India Limited ( Company / Applicant ), a company incorporated in India under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Gat No.463-A,463-B and 464, Pune-Bangalore Highway, Mouje Dhangarwadi, Tal : Khandala, Dist Satara. 4128011[MS]. 2. The applicant is engaged in providing goods and services which qualify as supply as per provisions of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 ( CGST Act ) and is duly registered thereunder bearing GSTIN 27AABCP2572Q1ZW. 3. The Company is engaged in the business of design, manufacturing, procurement, erection and installation of various types of car parking system. Supply and installation of car parking system involves several components, out of which certain components are manufactured by the Company and remaining are bought out items. The Company undertakes the activity qua the following types of car parking systems: Stacker type parking system: Puzzle type parking system: Multi-level parking syste ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, none of the car parking systems can be a readymade assembled unit and its erection cannot be done in a routine manner. 7. For ease of understating of the complex process of installation of Car parking system, we have depicted the same by way of a diagram: Drawing design of the car parking system is prepared according to the requirement of the customer Manufacture, build, test, dismantle, packing and supply steps Buildings specific foundation (either in the basement of building or on land) as per the requirement of the car parking to be installed Steel structure frame work (and/or RCC support) according to the car parking system is created and installed on the foundation Various parts such as pellets, control panel, side sliding suspension, operator panel, electrical system are installed in the RCC structure Safety features such as pallet overriding sensor, guiding sensor, car loading sensor and other safety equipments are installed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... movability has been subjected to intense judicial scrutiny over the years. Based on the past judicial precedents and relevant provisions; following determinative parameters have been derived for examining the nature of a transaction: Whether it is a permanent fixture attached to building/land or not; Whether dismantling of the parts is mandatory for movement or not; Whether the functionality of the system depends upon its installation or not. In the paragraphs below all the above three parameters are examined in reference to the facts presented by the Applicant. Supply installation of car parking system is a permanent fixture attached to building/land wherein it is erected 2.3 It shall be noted that the term immovable property has not been defined under the CGST Act. Thus, reference is made to the definition of immovable property under the General Clauses Act, 1987 Black s Laws Dictionary which is as under: Immovable property shall include land. benefits to arise out of land and things attached to the earth. or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth - As per General Clauses Act / Maharashtra Stamp Act. Immovable propert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for being bought and sold. Therefore, both the tests, as explained by this Court, were not satisfied in the case of appellant as the tube mill or welding head having been erected and installed in the premises and embedded to earth they ceased to be goods within meaning of Section 3 of the Act. 2.5 On cumulative reading of the above, it is evident that immovable property means a property that is attached to land and is a part and parcel of land itself. In the present facts, the car parking system is installed either in the building or vacant land. One of the essential requirement of the car parking system is specific foundation and steel structure/civil structure which is erected in the building or on land Thus, after installation, the said car parking system would form part of the building. 2.6 In this regard, we would like to highlight that in terms of the Supreme Court Ruling in the matter of Nahalchand Laloochand P. Ltd vs Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. [2010 AIR SCW 5549], = 2010 (8) TMI 816 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA it was inter alia observed that builder cannot sell car parking to the individual flat owners as it is a part of common area of land or bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntling, are actually dismantled into their components/parts for ease of transportation etc., they will not cease to be dutiable merely because they are transported in dismantled condition. Rule2(a) of the Rules for the Interpretation of Central Excise Tariff will be attracted as the guiding factor is capability of being marketed in the original form and not whether it is actually dismantled or not, into its components. Each case will therefore have to be decided keeping in view the facts and circumstances, particularly whether it is practically possible (considering the size and nature of the goods, the existence of appropriate transport by air, water, land for such size, capability of goods to move on self propulsion -ships- etc.) to remove and sell the goods as they are, without dismantling into their components. If the goods are incapable of being sold, shifted and marketed without first being dismantled into component parts, the goods would be considered as immovable and therefore not excisable to duty. II. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay vs Indian Oil co. Ltd [AIR 1991 SC 686] = 1990 (11) TMI 407 - SUPREME COURT Permanency is the test. The chattel wheth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty does not come into existence and cannot be made functional. Parts of the immovable property in its singular form Cannot be considered as immovable property. 2.13. In this context, reference is made to the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Kone Elevator India Private Limited Vs. State of Tamil Nadu [2014 (304) ELT 161 (SC)] = 2014 (5) TMI 265 - SUPREME COURT wherein the issue of immovability of lift was discussed. Relevant extract or the judgment is reproduced below: The lift basically comprises components like lift car, motors, ropes, rails, etc. having their own identity even prior to installation. Without installation, the lift cannot be mechanically functional because it is a permanent fixture of the building having been so designed. These aspects have been elaborately discussed in Otis Elevator (supra) by the High Court of Bombay. Therefore, the installation of a lift in a building cannot be regarded as a transfer of a chattel or goods but a composite contract. 2.14. Reference is also drawn from Hon ble Supreme Court s decision in the case of Triveni Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. CCE [2000 (120) ELT 273], = 2000 (8) TMI 86 - SUPREME ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CCE, Indore Vs. Virdi Brothers [2007 (207) ELT 321 SC] = 2006 (12) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA It has been held that assembling of central air conditioning system amounts to immovable property. Craft Interiors Private Limited Vs CCE, Bangalore [2006 (203) ELT 529 SC] = 2006 (10) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA It has been held that storage units, running counters, overhead unit, rear and side unit, wall unit, pantry unit, kitchen unit are ordinarily immovable and cannot be removed without cannibalizing CCE, Mumbai Vs. Josts Engineering Company Limited [2002 (146) ELT 29 SC] = 2002 (8) TMI 107 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA It has been held that spray paint booth is considered as immovable property based on the following factors i) the outside portion of the structure is embedded to the earth ii) it can never be dismantled without damaging the portions iii) the system is touching the earth iv) the system cannot work without being installed. CCE, Mumbai IV Vs. Hindustan Max Telecom Private Limited [2008 (224) E.L.T 191 (Bom.) = 2007 (8) TMI 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iff Item Description of Goods 8428 Other lifting, handling, loading or unloading machinery (For example, lifts, escalators, conveyors teleferics) Further, it may be seen that the service portion of installation of said items i.e. lifts and escalators is covered under the Service Codes (Tariff) (SAC) NO. 995466 under Installation Services Group. The entry Of Group NO. 995466 is reproduced herein as under- Group No. Installation Services 995466 Lift and escalator installation services 4.3 From the above it is clear that under GST Regime the manufacturing of Car parking System is covered under HSN code 8428 and the installation and commissioning of the same is covered under SAC code 995466. In the instant matter It is obvious that the applicant generally receive composite order for manufacturing and installation of car parking system. Therefore, the same is to be considered as composite supply as defined under clause (30) of Section 2 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The text of clause (30) of Section 2 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... letion, erection, installation, fitting out, improvement, modification, repair, maintenance, renovation, alteration or commissioning of any immovable property wherein transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) is involved in the execution of such contract; As can be seen from the words underlined above, a works contract under the GST Act is in relation to immovable property . It is, therefore, that we see that all submission by the applicant is directed to convince us about the activity of supply and installation of car parking system being resulting into immovable property . While we see that the jurisdictional officer has offered comments as to the activity being a composite supply as defined under clause (30) of section 2 of the GST Act, with the supply of car parking system being the principal supply, we feel inclined to answer the question in the affirmative. Our reasons follow thus - At the cost of repetition, we reproduce the activities that go into supply and installation of car parking system hereinbelow for immediate reference Drawing design of the car parking system is prepared according to the require ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... play an important role to put the system in place. These would have to be integrated at the site. The site could be a building or independent vacant land. The applicant informs that irrespective of the location, a specific foundation is created and steel structure and / or RCC structure, which is a basic frame work of the parking system, is erected in such foundation. It is further informed that this specific foundation and structure is a pre-requisite for successful installation and effective working of the car parking system. With an overview of the activity, we turn to the definition of works contract as appearing in the GST Act. We see that the same includes activities for building, construction, fabrication, completion, erection, installation, fitting out, improvement, modification, repair, maintenance, renovation, alteration or commissioning of any immovable property wherein transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some Other form) is involved in the execution of the contract. When the activity is to be performed in respect of a pre-existing building or an under-construction building, the plans showing the location of the car parking system, the load-bearing, e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Drilling Machines which were erected and commissioned on site. The judgment was delivered thus - 8. In their reply to the show cause, the respondents explained the processes involved, the manner in which the equipments were assembled and erected as also their specifications in terms of volume and weight. It was explained that the function of the drilling machine is to drill hole in the blast furnace to enable the molten steel to flow out of the blast furnace for collection in ladles for further processing. After the molten material is taken out of the blast furnace, the hole in the wall of the furnace has to be closed by spraying special clay. This function is performed by the mudgun which is brought to its position and locked against the wall for exerting a force of 240-300 tons to fill up the hole in the furnace. The blast furnace in which the inputs are loaded is a massive vessel of 1719 m cubic metre capacity and the size of its outer diameter is 10.6 metres, and the height 31.25 metres. Hot air at 1200 degrees centigrade is fed into the blast furnace at various levels to melt the raw materials. With a view to protect the shell against heat, the blast furnace is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or install the same at a height of 25 feet on the cast floor of the blast furnace. She found that even the Adjudicating Authority conceded the fact that the equipments have to be assembled/erected on the base frame projection of the furnace. She also accepted the submission urged on behalf of the appellant that if the machines are to be removed from the blast furnace, they have to be first dismantled into parts and brought down to the ground only by using cranes and trolley ways considering the size, and also considering the fact that there is no space available for moving the machines in assembled condition due to their volume and weight. She considered the authorities on the subject and came to the conclusion that erection of mudgun and tap hole drilling machine results in erection of immovable property. She noticed the judgment of this Court in Narne Tulaman Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and also noticed the judgment of the Tribunal in Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing (Weaving) Co. Ltd. v. CCE - 1993 (65) E.L.T. 121; = 1992 (10) TMI 188 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI which held that the issue of immovable property was never raised before the Supreme Court in Narne Tulaman Manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re were no bolts and nuts for holding the tanks on to the foundation. The tanks remained in position by its own weight, each tank being about 30 feet in height 50 feet in diameter weighing about 40 tons. The tanks were connected with pump house with pipes for pumping petroleum products into the tank and sending them back to the pump house. The question arose in the context of ascertaining the rateable value of the structures under the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. The High Court held that the tanks are neither structure nor a building nor land under the Act. While allowing the appeal this Court observed :- (SCC p. 33, para 32) 32. The tanks, though, are resting on earth on their own weight without being fixed with nuts and bolts, they have permanently been erected without being shifted from place to place. Permanency is the test. The chattel whether is movable to another place of use in the same position or liable to be dismantled and re-erected at the later place? If the answer is yes to the former it must be a movable property and thereby it must be held that it is not attached to the earth. If the answer is yes to the latter it is attached to the earth. If the answer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exgibility of an article to duty under the Excise Act are that it must be a goods mentioned either in the Schedule or under Item 68 and must be marketable. The word goods applied to those which can be brought to market for being bought and sold and therefore, it implied that it applied to such goods as are movable. It noticed the decisions of this Court laying down the marketability tests. Thereafter this Court observed :- (SCC p.376, para 5) The basic test therefore, of levying duty under the Act is two fold. One, that any article, must be a goods and second, that it should be marketable or capable of being brought to market. Goods which are attached to the earth and thus become immoveable do not satisfy the test of being goods within the meaning of the Act nor it can be said to be capable of being brought to the market for being bought and sold. Therefore, both the tests, as explained by this Court, were not satisfied in the case of appellant as the tube mill or welding head having been erected and installed in the premises and embedded to earth they ceased to be goods within meaning of Section 3 of the Act. 26. In Mittal Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE - 1996 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lation or erection of turbo alternator on the platform constructed on the land would be immovable property, as such it cannot be an excisable goods falling within the meaning of Heading 85.02. In reaching this conclusion this Court considered the earlier judgments of this Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay (1991 Supp (2) SCC 18)] = 1990 (11) TMI 407 - SUPREME COURT , Quality Steel Tubes (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, UP - 1995 (75) E.L.T. 17 (S.C.) = 1994 (12) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA and Mittal Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE - 1996 (88) E.L.T. 622 (S.C.) = 1996 (11) TMI 66 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA as also the earlier judgment of this Court in Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad - 1998 (97) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). = 1997 (12) TMI 109 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA This Court observed :- 14. There can be no doubt that if an article is an immovable property, it cannot be termed as excisable goods for purposes of the Act. From a combined reading of the definition of 'immovable property' in Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act, Section 3(25) of the General Clauses Act, it is evident that in an immov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , UP - 1995 (75) E.L.T. 17 (S.C.) = 1994 (12) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA and the principles underlying those decisions must apply to the facts of the case in hand. It cannot be disputed that such drilling machines and mudguns are not equipments which are usually shifted from one place to another, nor it is practicable to shift them frequently. Counsel for the appellant submitted before us that once they are erected and assembled they continue to operate from where they are positioned till such time as they are worn out or discarded. According to him they really become a component of the plant and machinery because without their aid a blast furnace cannot operate, it is not necessary for us to express any opinion as to whether the mudgun and the drilling machines are really a component of the plant and machinery of the steel plant, but we are satisfied that having regard to the manner in which these machines are erected and installed upon concrete structures, they do not answer the description of goods within the meaning of the term in the Excise Act. Thus, it can be seen that the Hon. Supreme Court while holding the machines as immovable property took into account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lared and classified parts and components being manufactured by them as complete plants/systems, even when they were merely parts and components and not machines or plants functional by themselves. The erroneous classification and declaration was, according to the notice, intended to avoid payment of higher rate of duty applicable to parts of such plants and machinery at the material point of time. The notice also pointed out that the units manufacturing parts and components of the plants had availed benefit of exemption wrongly and in breach of the provisions of Rules 9(1) and 173F and other rules regulating the grant of such benefit. 6. In so far as Solidmec marketing company was concerned, the show cause notice alleged that Solidmec was engaged in the manufacturing of Asphalt Batch Mix, Drum Mix/Hot Mix Plant by assembling and installing the parts and components manufactured by the manufacturing units of the group. According to the notice the process of assembly of the parts and components at the site provided by the purchasers of such plants was tantamount to manufacture of such plants as a distinct product with a new name, quality, usage and character emerged out of the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e permanent beneficial enjoyment of that to which it is attached. Attachment of the plant in question with the help of nuts and bolts to a foundation not more than 1 feet deep intended to provide stability to the working of the plant and prevent vibration/wobble free operation does not qualify for being described as attached to the earth under any one of the three clauses extracted above. That is because attachment of the plant to the foundation is not comparable or synonymous to trees and shrubs rooted in earth. It is also not synonymous to imbedding in earth of the plant as in the case of walls and buildings, for the obvious reason that a building imbedded in the earth is permanent and cannot be detached without demolition. Imbedding of a wall in the earth is also in no way comparable to attachment of a plant to a foundation meant only to provide stability to the plant especially because the attachment is not permanent and what is attached can be easily detached from the foundation. So also the attachment of the plant to the foundation at which it rests does not fall in the third category, for an attachment to fall in that category it must be for permanent beneficial enjoyment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the land beneath, creates an interest in immovable property, for it is permanently attached to the ground on which it is built. 30. The courts in this country have applied the test whether the annexation is with the object of permanent beneficial enjoyment of the land or building. Machinery for metal-shaping and electro-plating which was attached by bolts to special concrete bases and could not be easily removed, was not treated to be a part of structure or the soil beneath it, as the attachment was not for more beneficial enjoyment of either the soil or concrete. Attachment in order to qualify the expression attached to the earth, must be for the beneficial attachment of that to which it is attached. Doors, windows and shutters of a house are attached to the house, which is imbedded in the earth. They are attached to the house which is imbedded in the earth for the beneficial enjoyment of the house. They have no separate existence from the house. Articles attached that do not form part of the house such as window blinds, and sashes, and ornamental articles such as glasses and tapestry fixed by tenant, are not affixtures. 31. Applying the above tests to the case at hand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... embedding was meant only to provide a wobble free operation of the machine. Repelling that contention this Court held that just because the machine was attached to earth for a more efficient working and operation the same did not per se become immovable property. 34. The Court observed: ( Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. Case [(1998) 1 SCC 400] = 1997 (12) TMI 109 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA , SCC p. 402, para 5) 5. Apart from this finding of fact made by the Tribunal, the point advanced on behalf of the appellant, that whatever is embedded in earth must be treated as immovable property is basically not sound. For example, a factory owner or a house-holder may purchase a water pump and fix it on a cement base for operational efficiency and also for security. That will not make the water pump an item of immovable property. Some of the components of water pump may even be assembled on site. That too will not make any difference to the principle. The test is whether the paper making machine can be sold in the market. The Tribunal has found as a fact that it can be sold. In view of that finding, we are unable to uphold the contention of the appellant that the machine must be treate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt on facts noted that mono vertical crystallisers are fixed on a solid RCC slab having a load bearing capacity of about 30 tonnes per square metre and are assembled at sire with bottom plates, tanks, coils, drive frames, supports, plates. distance places, cullers, cutter supports, lank ribs, distance plate angles, water tanks, coil extension pipes, loose bend angles, coil supports, railing stands, intermediate platforms, drive frame railings and flats, oil trough, worm wheels, shafts, housing stirrer arms and support channels, pipes, floats, heaters. ladders, platforms. etc. The Court noted that the mono vertical crystallisers have to be assembled. erected and attached to the earth on a foundation at the Site of the sugar factory and are incapable of being sold to the consumers in the market as it is without anything more . 41. Relying upon the decision of this Court in Quality Steel Tubes Case [(1995) 2 SCC 372 : (1995) 75 ELT 17] = 1994 (12) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA , the erection and installation of mono vertical crystallisers was held no/ dutiable under the Excise Act. This Court observed that: [ Mittal Engg. Works (P) Ltd. case [(1997) 1 SCC 203 : (1996) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acter of the machine becomes extinct. The same cannot thereafter be treated as movable so as to be dutiable under the Excise Act. But cases in which there is no assimilation of the machine with the structure permanently, would stand on a different footing. 44. In the instant case all that has been said by the assessee is that the machine is fixed by nuts and bolts to a foundation not because the intention was to permanently attach it to the earth but because a foundation was necessary to provide a wobble free operation to the machine. An attachment of this kind without the necessary intent of making the same permanent cannot, in our opinion, constitute permanent fixing, embedding or attachment in the sense that would make the machine a part and parcel of the earth permanently. In that view of the matter we see no difficulty in holding that the plants in question were not immovable property so as to be immune from the levy of excise duty. Our answer to Question 1 is accordingly in the affirmative. Thus, we see how the Hon. Courts have evolved the term immovable property when faced with the question of what constitutes movable and immovable property. Though not issued fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly Base station controller / Base transreceiver station, cell site / Mobile Switching centre were connected with the transmission and reception signals and other equipments were not part of the same, the argument was held as not acceptable as without the tower, UPS, Cable trays, AC., etc., the BTS would not be in a position to function as transmitting and receiving apparatus. The contention of the assessee that various equipments installed at site were individual machine was rejected. The Commissioner further held that with the assembly of various equipment installed what emerges is a commodity with a distinct name, identity, character and use; distinct from inputs and classifiable under chapter 8525 of Central Excise Tariff and the same is distinct and separate from the various equipments which have gone into manufacture of the above transmission apparatus. The argument that after installation of BTS of cell site it becomes immovable properly was rejected. The statement of Narayan in his statement dated 28/1/2004 was partly relied upon to hold it was not immovable property. 8. The Learned Tribunal re-examining the various aspects of what is described as determination of lev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oning cell site cannot be an activity of either manufacture and no marketable goods arise. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal was allowed and accordingly, the orders were set aside. 9. It is not necessary for us to answer the issue as to whether the activities is purely service and consequently, the appellants are not manufacturers. We proceed on the footing that what has been assembled and installed is a new commodity having a distinct name from the components from which it was assembled. The question is whether this new commodity is marketable. We have already considered the test of marketability as laid down by the Supreme Court in Triveni Engineering India Ltd. (supra) and also Moti Laminates Pvt. Ltd. (supra). At this stage, we also note that we proceed on the footing by ignoring the second finding of marketability recorded by the Tribunal namely that BTS/BSC is not marketable as licence is required from the Department of Telecommunication, Government of India. The facts on record would indicate that the equipments erected are embedded in the earth or on a building. The Tribunal noted that revenue does not contest or dispute the fact that whenever BTS/BSC site has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s along with their facts has made things clearer for us. The principles when seen in the light of the facts of the present case help us see thus - The impugned car parking system, be it installed on a vacant plot of land or in a building, does not result into supply as chattel. In fact, before installation, there can be no goods as such which could be called a car parking system The system requires substantial work to be done at the site to be called a car parking system . Once made operational the car parking system obtains a state of permanency. It is not such as can be easily removed from the existing place and put into place at some other location. The definition of works contract under the GST Act is in relation to immovable property. We have already elaborately explained our opinion as to the facts at pages 6 and 7 of this order. In view thereof, we are of the considered opinion that the transaction of supply and installation of a car parking system would qualify as immovable property and thereby works contract as defined in Section 2(119) of the CGST Act. Since we are called upon to decide the coverage of the impugned transaction only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
