9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... three questions was whether the appellant is a "governmental authority" or otherwise. The GAAR examined the issue and held that the appellant does not fall under the definition of "governmental authority". Accordingly, the GAAR, vide Advance Ruling No. GUJ/GAAR/R/38/2020 dated 03.07.2020, answered in negative in respect of all the aforesaid three questions. 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid advance ruling to the extent of denial of exemption under Sr. No. 45 and Sr. No. 4 of Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended from time to time and corresponding Notification No. 12/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 30.06.2017 as amended from time to time (the Central Tax (Rate) Notification herein after referred to includes the reference to corresponding State Tax (Rate) Notification also), the appellant has filed the present appeal. Thus, the appellant has not challenged the advance ruling in respect of question number 3 raised by it. 4.1 The appellant has referred to the definition of "governmental authority" given under section 2(16) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (herein after referred to as the "IGST Act, 2017") and has submitted that since it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (b) a Partnership Firm of Advocates or an individual as an advocate other than a Senior advocate, by way of legal services to- (i)-------------; (ii)-----------; (iii)---------; (iv) the Central Government, State Government, Union territory, local authority, Governmental Authority or Government entity. (c) a Senior advocate by way of legal services to- (i)--------------; (ii)-------------; (iii) the Central Government, State Government, Union territory, local authority, Governmental Authority or Government entity. Nil Nil * * * Against Serial Number 4, in the entry in column (3), the words "Central Government, State Government, Union Territory, local authority or" were omitted (w.e.f. 27.07.2018) vide Notification No. 14/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 26.07.2018. 6.2 As per clause (zf) of para 2 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), "governmental authority" has the same meaning as assigned to it in the Explanation to clause (16) of section 2 of the IGST Act, 2017. The said Explanation reads as follows :- Explanation. - For the purposes of this clause, the expression "governmental authority" means an authority or a board or any other body, - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition mentioned below item (ii) is applicable or not to item (i) as semi colon followed by 'or' has been used at the end of item (i) of the definition of "Governmental Authority". 8.2.1 The appellant has relied upon the judgements in the case of Shapoorji Paloonji & Company Ltd. V/s CCE, Patna [2016-TIOL-556-HC-PATNA-ST] which was rendered in the context of similar definition under the Finance Act, 1994 (Service Tax matter). 8.2.2 In this regard, we note that Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. CC 7472 of 2017 has been filed by the department in the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble High Court of Patna and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued notice in this case on 13.04.2017. Therefore, the aforesaid judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Patna in the case of Shapoorji Paloonji & Company Pvt. Ltd. is in jeopardy, in view of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. [2004 (164) E.L.T. 375 (S.C.)], wherein it has been held as under - "14. Article 136 of the Constitution of India confers a special power upon this Court in terms whereof an appeal shall lie against any order passed by a Court or Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt, and at one hundred and thirty five percent of the purchase value of such liquor in the case of those situated in any other place; or (b) at one hundred and fifteen percent of the highest turnover tax payable by it as conceded in there turn or accounts or the turnover tax paid for any of the previous consecutive three years, whichever is higher. ......... 29. Re-contention No. (iii): In Statutory interpretation by Francis Bennion, it is said, punctuation forms part of an Act, and may be used as a guide to interpretation. Punctuation is generally of little weight, however, since the sense of an Act should be the same with or without punctuation. It is further said, that punctuation is a device not for making meaning, but for making meaning plain, its purpose, as Bouvier said, is to denote the stops that ought to be made in oral reading, and to point out the sense. Drafters are instructed that they should on no account, allow the meaning to turn, on the presence or absense of a punctuation mark. The good drafter consciously drafts every clause with an eye to what its sense would be if all such marks were removed. 30. Crawford in his book on "Statutory construction" says t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 7. Though the argument looks attractive at the first blush, on a deeper consideration, in our view, it has no substance. .......... 35. ......... 36. Sri. Sudha Vasudevan, learned Counsel submits that the draftsman has used semicolon at the end of Clause (a) of Section 7 of the Act and thereby there is break in the sentence and after that the word 'or' is used, which only denotes, the legislature's intention is to give alternatives to the persons who are eligible to make use of the composition scheme either to choose Clause (a) of Section 7 of the Act or in the alternative Clause (b) of Section 7. This submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is difficult to accept for more than one reason. Firstly, the punctuation markes used in a fiscal legislation need not be given more weight as explained by Apex Court in Arbinda Bose's case and secondly, even if the draftsman has used the semi-colon in between Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 7 of the Act, it would not imply the complete break of sentence and it makes a partial break and at the same time a link between sentences appearing on the same subject. ............." 9.1 Now coming back to the defin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sen about the applicability of long line mentioned in clause (a) of Notification No. 50/2018-Central Tax dated 13.09.2018. It is clarified that the long line mentioned in clause (a) in Notification No. 50/2018-Central Tax dated 13.09.2018 is applicable to both the items (1) and (ii) of clause (a) of the said Notification. Thus, an authority or board or any other body whether set up by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature or established by any Government with fifty one percent or more participation by way of equity or control, to carry out any function would only be liable to deduct tax at source. 3. In other words, the provisions of Section 51 of the CGST Act, are applicable to only such authority or board or any other body whether set up by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature or established by any Government in which fifty one percent or more participation by way of equity or control, is with the Government. 9.3.3 The aforesaid clarification issued by the CBIC is equally applicable to the interpretation of the clause (zf) of para 2 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) on the principle of 'contemporaneaexpositio'. In the case of Ajay Gandhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he intention and purport of the Notification. Courts have treated contemporary official statements as contemporary exposition and used them as aids' to interpret even recent statutes. 29. Thus in Collector v. Andhra Sugar [5][(1988) 3 Supp (SCR) 543 Mukharji, J] (as His Lordship then was) said - "It is well settled that the meaning ascribed by the authority issuing the Notification, is a good guide of a contemporaneous exposition of the position of law. Reference may be made to the observations of this Court in K.P. Varghese v. The Income Tax Officer, Ernakulam (1982) 1 SCR 629. It is a well settled principle of interpretation that courts in construing a Statute will give much weight to the interpretation put upon it at the time of its enactment and since, by those whose duty has been to construe, execute and apply the same enactment" [See also in Karnataka SSIDCL v. CIT (2002) Supp 4 SCR 453, 460.] 9.3.4 Thus, it supports our view that the condition mentioned below item (ii) of clause (zf) of para 2 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) are applicable to both the items (i) and (ii) of the said clause. 9.4 We may look this aspect from another angle also. Had it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant. 12. Further, Sr. No. 45 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax provides exemption to services provided by an arbitral tribunal, a Partnership Firm of Advocates, an individual as an advocate or a Senior advocate, by way of legal services to Central Government, State Government, Union Territory, local authority, Governmental Authority or Government entity. Again, the appellant admittedly does not fall under any of the categories of Central Government, State Government, Union Territory or local authority. We have already held that the appellant is not a "Governmental Authority". The appellant has not claimed it to be "Government entity". The definition of "Government entity" at clause (zfa) of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax also provides condition of 90 per cent or more participation by way of equity or control, which the appellant does not satisfy. Therefore, we hold that the exemption provided vide Sr. No. 45 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) is not admissible to the appellant. 13. We, therefore, reject the appeal filed by the appellant and confirm the Advance Ruling No. GUJ/GAAR/R/38/2020 dated 03.07.2020 issued by the GAAR, to the extent i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
