TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not undertaken the supply in the subject case. Rather, the applicant is a recipient of impugned services in the subject case. The impugned transactions are not in relation to the supply of goods or services or both undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant and therefore, the subject application cannot be admitted as per the provisions of Section 95 of the GST Act. Hence without discussing the merits of the case, the subject application is rejected as not being maintainable. - GST-ARA-91/2019-20/B-80 - - - Dated:- 25-10-2021 - SHRI. RAJIV MAGOO, AND SHRI. T. R. RAMNANI, MEMBER PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) The present application has been filed under Section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as the CGST Act and MGST Act respectively] by M/s. GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following question. Whether Works contract awarded under the Krishna Bhima stabilization projec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.00 TCM 2 Excavation in H.S. 1600.00TCM 3 Underground excavation of tunnel 978.00 TCM 4 Concrete work for tunnel lining by concrete pump 38.00 TCM 5 Structural steel permanent support 1418.00 MT 6 Steel reinforcements 380.00MT 7 Length of tunnel 24.50 Km Estimated cost of the above work is derived at ₹ 438.37 Crores as follows- Sr.No. Particulars Value of work (in crores) In % Various Excavation and related activity Others 1 Excavation 14.93 3.41% 3.41% 2 Excavation 55.46 12.65% 12.65% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as follows Sr No Date of work valued Particulars Amount In % of total contract value 1 05 th November 2014 First RA bill ₹ 6.20 Crores 1.15% of total billings 2 30 th June 2017 Second RA bill ₹ 8.36 Crores 1.56% of total billings 2.6 Out of total estimated work approximately 2.00% is completed before 01.07.2017 i.e. date of implementation of the GST Act, 2017 rest of the works contract is still under execution. 2.7 The Relevant entry of Notification No 11/2017 C.T.(R) as amended by Notification No. 31/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 13th Oct 2017 is reproduced as under : (vii) Composite supply of works contract as defined in clause (119) of section 2 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, involving predominantly earth work (that is, constituting more than 75per cent. of the value of the works contract) provided to the Central G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Amount in Rs Crores. In % 1 Various Excavation and excavated material mobilisation 406.18 92.67% 2 Others 31.82 7.33% Total 438.00 100.00% 2.12 Since the earth work is more than 75% of the total contract value, said contract is considered to be involving predominantly earth work. 2.13 Also, as per Notification 31/2017-C.T.(Rate) a Government entity should be :- 1. An Authority or board ; 2. set up by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature or established by any government 3. 90% participation by way of equity or control 2.14 Applicant is a body constituted under the Maharashtra Act XXIII of 1998 and established by notification published in Gazette Irrigation department dated 17th August 1998. 2.15 Applicant's activities are controlled and managed by duties and responsibilities mentioned in the Maharashtra Act XXIII of 1998. Any contract or tenders awarded are mitigated out of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity to get registered. Thereby, the present applicant cannot be classified as one desirous of obtaining registration under the Act. Thus, the present applicant is not eligible to file application on that count also. 3.3 The present applicant is desirous of advance ruling on the applicability of sub clause (vii) of Serial No 3 of Heading 9954 (construction of service) substituted by way of Notification No 31/2017 C.T.(R) dtd 13.10.2017, to the supply provided by one M/s Soma Mohite-Joint Venture to the applicant. The applicant has entrusted work of construction of Tunnel from Nira Bhima Link No 5 Tq. Indapur Dist. Pune under Krishna Bhima Stabilization project to M/s Soma Mohite-Joint Venture. The applicant has submitted copy of Order issued by the Maharashtra Appellate Authority of Advance Rulings (MAAR) (Order No. MAH/AAAR/SS-RJ/21/2019-20 Dt. 20/01/2020). The AAAR ruling was passed on appeal by M/s Soma Mohite Joint Venture and has already dealt with the question of applicability of 'sub-clause (vii) of serial no 3 of Heading 9954 (construction of service) substituted by way of Notification No 31/2017 C.T.(R) dt 13.10.2017 to original Notification No. 11/2017-C.T. (Rat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 2018-19 2,09,40,50,577 5,23,51,264 5,23,51,264 0 3 2019-20 2,42,95,00,045 14,57,70,003 14,57,70,003 0 4 2020-21 2,17,46,88,412 6,24,22,611 6,24,22,611 0 5 2021-22 19,59,17,981 50,31,302 50,31,302 0 6 Total 7,28,77,28,503 28,91,89,479 28,91,89,479 0 3.8 It is further seen from TDS data that the supplier Soma Mohite (JV) has received credit of TDS u/s 51 of CGST/MGST Act, 2017 and accepted the same. The TDS deductor is Executive Engineer Krishna Marathwada Construction Division. 3.9 As per submissions of the applicant the work was originally estimated to cost ₹ 4,38,36,37,599/-. It is also mentioned by applicant that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oposed to be undertaken by the applicant. 5.5 Section 95 of the CGST Act, 2017 allows this authority to decide the matter in respect of supply of goods or services or both, undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. We find that the applicant has not undertaken the supply in the subject case. Rather, the applicant is a recipient of impugned services in the subject case. The impugned transactions are not in relation to the supply of goods or services or both undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant and therefore, the subject application cannot be admitted as per the provisions of Section 95 of the GST Act. Hence without discussing the merits of the case, we reject the subject application as not being maintainable. 06. In view of the extensive deliberations as held hereinabove, we pass an order as follows: ORDER (Under Section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) For reasons as discussed in the body of the order, the questions are answered thus- The present application filed for advance ruling is rejected, as being non-maintainable as per the provisions of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
