Below is the compilation of Rulings by AAAR Maharashtra. The Compilation provides the subject of the Ruling along with the Date of Ruling. Link to Download has also been given alongwith the Ruling :
Case: Apsara Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. dated: 05.11.2020
Query:
1) Whether the activities carried out by the applicant for its members qualify as “supply” under the definition of Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017.
2) If the activities of the applicant are treated as supply” under CGST Act, 2017 then whether the applicant has correctly discharged the GST as per the illustrative copy of the invoice generated by the Applicant?
The Maharasthra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the Ruling passed by the Maharashtra Advance Ruling Authority, vide their Order No. GST-ARA-21/2019-20/B-34 dated 17.03.2020 and stated that the activities carried out by the Appellant would amount to supply in terms of Section 7(1)(a) of the CGST Act, 2017, and the same would be liable for GST subject to the condition that the monthly subscription/contribution charged by the society from its members is more than Rs. 7500/- per month per member and the annual aggregate turnover of the society by way of supplying of services and goods is also Rs. 20 lakhs or more. Further, their second question regarding correctness of the GST liability on the basis of the illustrative invoices cannot be answered on account of the above stated reasons.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Liberty Translines dated: 26.08.2020
Query:
(i.) Considering the nature of transaction, under the new proposition where Liberty Translines the Appellant would be issuing the consignment note to M/s. Posco ISDC Pvt. Ltd.in addition to the consignment note, issued by M/s. Posco ISDC Pvt. Ltd. to their clients, whether the services, rendered by the Applicant to M/s. Posco ISDC Pvt. Ltd. as a sub-contractor, would be classified as GTA service ( SAC 996791), when the service rendered by M/s. Posco ISDC Pvt. Ltd., as the main contractor, is already classified as GTA service (SAC 996791) and is going to remain unchanged ?
(ii.) Whether the Appellant would be right in charging GST @12%, under forward charge mechanism to M/s. Posco ISDC Pvt. Ltd., in terms of Notification No. 20/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 22.08.2017, when M/s. Posco ISDC Pvt. Ltd. as the main contractor is already charging GST @12% under the same Notification, which is going to remain unchanged ?
(iii.) Whether M/s. Posco ISDC Pvt. Ltd. would be eligible to claim credit of the 12% GST charged by the appellant in its invoice issued under forward charge mechanism ?
(iv.) Procedurally, is it correct to have two GTA Service Providers and two consignment notes for the same movement of goods, one issued by the Appellant as a sub-contractor and the other by M/s. Posco ISDC Pvt. Ltd. as the main contractor?
The Maharashtra Appellate Authority confirmed the Maharashtra Advance Ruling Autority Order by holding that the activities of the Appellant would not be classified as GTA service under the Head 996791 as there cannot be two GTAs in the single transportation of the goods.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Las Palmas Co-Op. Housing Society dated: 20.07.2020
Query: Whether the Appellant is eligible for the ITC of lift installation charges paid to Fujitec, if it is booked as capital expenditure in their books without availing the depreciation on 18% GST charged by Fujitec?
The Maharashtra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling while upholding the ruling given by the Maharastra Advance Ruling Authority held that the Appellant will not be eligible to avail the ITC in respect of the lift installation charges paid to the lift contractor, in terms of section 16(2)(b) read with section 17(5)(c) and 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act, 2017.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Vijay Baburao Shirke dated: 04.06.2020
Query: Receipt of prize money from horse race conducting entities, in the event where the horse owned by the applicant wins the race, would amount to ‘supply’ under section 7 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 or not and consequently, liable to GST or not
The Appellant Authority set aside the advance ruling issued by AAR, and hold that prize money/ stakes will not be subject to GST in the absence of any supply. Accordingly, the Applicant- Respondent is also not entitled to avail any ITC in accordance with the provisions of section 17 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Vertiv Energy Pvt. Ltd. dated: 07.02.2020
Query:
i. whether the contract entered into with DMRC for supply, erection, installation, commissioning and testing of UPS system qualifies as supply of works contract under Section 2(119) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act, 2017“).
ii. If yes, whether such supply made to DMRC would be taxable at the rate of 12% in terms of Sr. No. 3(v) of the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended w.e.f. 25.01.2018.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, hereby, modify the AAR ruling to the extent that the supplies under question would not be considered as “Composite Supply” in terms of section 2(30) read with section 2(90) of the CGST Act, 2017.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Soma Mohite Joint Venture Pvt. Ltd dated: 20.01.2020
Query:
i. Whether the said contract is covered under SI No – 3A, Chapter No 99 as per Notification No. 2/2018-Central Tax (rate) dated 25thJanuary 2018, w.e.f. 25th January 2018?
ii. Whether the said contract is covered under the term “Earth Work” and the covered under SI No – Chapter No. 9954 as per Notification No. 31/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 13th October 2017?
iii. If Appellants are covered under SI No. 3 Chapter No. 995 as per Notification No. 31/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 13th October 201 w.e.f. 13′h October 2017, then what is the meaning of “Earth Work”?
The Maharashtra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that the services provided by the Appellant in the impugned matter qualifies for inclusion under entry 3(vii) of the Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 (as amended by Notification No. 31/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 13.10.2017)
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Kasturba Health Society dated: 13.12.2019
Query:
Following questions were framed and referred for the consideration by the Honourable Bench of Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling duly constituted under section 96 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.-
i. Whether the applicant, a Charitable Society, having the main object and factually engaged in imparting Medical Education, satisfying all the criteria of “Educational Institution”, can be said to be engaged in the business so as to cast an obligation upon it to comply with the provisions of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 in totality.
ii. Whether the applicant, a Charitable Society having the main object and factually engaged in imparting Medical Education, satisfying all the criteria of “Educational Institution” is liable for registration under the provisions of section 22 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 or it can remain outside the preview of registration in view of the provisions of section 23 of the said act as there is no Taxable supply.
iii. In a situation if above questions are answered against the contention of the appellant institution then following further questions were raised for the kind consideration by the Honourable Bench.-
a. Whether the fees and other charges received from students and recoupment charges received from patients (who is an essential clinical material for education laboratory) would constitute as “outward supply” as defined in section 2 (83) of The Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and if yes then whether it will fall in classification entry at Sr. No 66 or the portion of nominal amount received from patients (who is an essential clinical material for education laboratory) at Sr. No. 74 in terms of Notification 12/2017 Central Tax-dt. 28/6/2017.
b. Whether the cost of Medicines and Consumables recovered from OPD patients along with nominal charges collected for Diagnosing by the pathological investigations, other investigation such as CT-Scan, MRI, Colour Doppler, Angiography, Gastroscopy, Sonography during the course of diagnosis and treatment of disease would fall within the meaning of “composite supply” qualifying for exemption under the category of “educational and/or health care services.”
c. Whether the nominal charges received from patients (who is on essential clinical materials for education laboratory) towards an “Unparallel Health Insurance Scheme” to retain their flow at one end for the purpose of imparting medical education as a result to provide them the benefit of concessional rates for investigations and treatment at other end would fall within the meaning of “supply” eligible for exemption under the category of “Educational and/or Health Care Services.”
d. Whether the nominal amount received for making space available for essential facilities needed by the students and staffs such as Banking, Parking, Refreshment etc. which are support activities for attainment of main activities and further amount received on account of disposal of wastage would fall within the meaning of “supply” qualifying for exemption under the category of “educational and/or health care services.”
The Maharashtra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that the questions by the Appellant are not maintainable in terms of the Clause (a) of section 95 of the CGST Act, 2017, as the transaction with respect to which the Appellant has asked the questions, are not pertaining to the Appellant.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Bajaj Finance Limited dated: 12.12.2019
Query :Whether the penal interest charged by the Applicants, which is in the nature of interest on loans, from its customers is in the nature of tolerating an act in terms of entry 5( e) of Schedule II of the CGST Act, 2017 or whether the same is in the nature of additional interest and is exempt vide Serial No. 27 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, hereby, hold that the additional/Penal interest recovered by the Applicant from their customers against the delayed payment of monthly instalments of the loan extended to such customers, would be exempt from GST in terms of Sl. 27 of the Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Micro Instruments dated 11.12.2019
Query: Intermediary services
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, hereby, reject the application filed by the Appellant under section 102 of the CGST Act, 2017 seeking the amendment in the AAAR Order No. MAH/AAAR/SS-RJ/26/2018-19 dated 22.03.2019
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Bandai Namco Pvt. Ltd dated: 21.11.2019
Query: GST Rate on Operating Game Zone in Mall
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, hereby, uphold the ruling pronounced by the Advance Ruling Authority, wherein it was held that the gaming zone operated by the Appellant in the mall premises would attract GST at the rate of 28%(CGST @14% + SGST@14%) in terms of the entry (iiia) of Sr.34 of the Notification No. 11/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended by the Notification No. 1/2018 –C.T. (Rate) dated 25.01.2018.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Mayank Jain dated: 20.11.2019
Query:
a. Whether the Marketing services to be supplied by the Appellant under the proposed Agreement would constitute supply of “Support services” classified under SAC 9985 or “Intermediary service” classifiable under SAC 9961 / 9962 or any other heading?
b. Whether the Handholding services to be supplied by the Appellant under the proposed Agreement would constitute supply of “Support services” falling under SAC 9985 or “Intermediary service” classifiable under SAC 9961 / 9962 or any other heading?
c. Whether the Marketing services to be provided by the Appellant will be an export of services as defined under Section 2(6) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (“IGST”) Act 2017?
d. Whether the Handholding services to be provided by the Appellant will be an export of services as defined under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, hereby, hold that the entire gamut of activities performed by the Appellant in terms of the subject agreement, are those of an intermediary, which would be classified under the heading 9997 bearing the description 9997. As regards the issue of export of the services provided by the Appellant, it is held that advance ruling in this issue cannot be passed as the same is beyond our jurisdiction.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Nikhil Comforts dated: 11.11.2019
Query: GST on Supply/ Installation/ erection and assembly of complete Air Conditioning plants
The Maharashtra Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling while confirming the order of the Maharashtra Advance Ruling Authority held that the contract in the impugned case is though a composite supply not for immoveable property, and therefore does not fall under the definition of ‘works contract’. The principal supply in the case is of Air conditioning units and the entire contract is taxable @ 28%.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Konkan LNG Private Limited dated: 06.11.2019
Query: Whether the Appellant is eligible for taking ITC on construction of breakwater, which is an important and integral part of the existing jetty?
The Maharashtra Appellate Authority confirmed the Maharashtra Advance Ruling Autority Order by holding that the Appellant is not eligible for taking ITC in terms of section 16 read with section 17 of the MGST ACT / CGST ACT ( CGST/ SGST / IGST ) on construction of the above said Breakwater.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Rotary Club of Mumbai Queens Necklace dated: 06.11.2019
Query:
i) The amount collected as membership subscription and admission fees from members is liable to GST as supply of services?
(ii) If the above receipts are liable to GST, can the appellant claim Input tax credit of the tax paid on the Banquet and Catering services for holding members meetings and various events?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, hereby, hold that the amount collected as membership subscription and admission fees from members is not liable to GST as supply of services.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: H.P. Sales India Pvt. Ltd., dated: 04.11.2019
Query: Type of Supply
The Applletate authority did not find any reason to amend our original order dated 17.02.2019, wherein it was held that the supply of the ElectroInk along with the other consumables comprising of blanket, photo imaging plate, binary ink developer, HP imaging oil, blanket web and other machinery products by the Appellant to its customers is ‘mixed supply’ and not the ‘composite supply’, as being claimed by the Appellant.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: CMS Infosystems Ltd. dated: 31.10.2019
Query:
i) Whether supply of such motor vehicles as scrap after its usage can be treated as supply in the course of furtherance of business and whether such transaction would attract GST? If yes, please provide the rate of GST and / or Compensation Cess.
(ii) If answer to question (i) is in affirmative, whether Input Tax Credit is available to CMS Info Systems Ltd. on purchase of motor vehicles i.e. cash carry vans which are purchased, used for cash management business and supplied post usage as scrap.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, hereby, hold that Input Tax Credit against the GST paid on the purchase, and fabrication of the motor vehicles, used for carrying cash and bullions, is available to the Appellant.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Multiples Alternate Asset Management Private Limited dated: 04.10.2019
Query: Confirmation of its interpretation of the law with regard to applicability of GST on its Services
The Appellate authority held that since the questions asked by the Appellant are not covered under the jurisdiction of the advance ruling, no ruling can be passed in the instant case.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: “Nagpur Integrated Township Pvt. ” dated: 24.10.2019
Query:
Whether the transaction between Applicant and lessee is outside the purview of GST as a transaction in immovable property?
If not, what is the appropriate classification and rate of GST?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling agree with the findings and order of the Advance ruling authority in as much as the impugned transaction entered into by the parties is not in nature of lease. The same is rather in the nature of construction of complex services being provided by the Appellant to its customers, and hence find no reason to deviate from the conclusions derived by them.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Ordnance Factory Bhandara dated: 18.10.2019
Query:
Question: 1) Being a part of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, whether our organization Ordnance Factory Bhandara is liable to pay GST on the following supply of services: –
a) Liquidated damages deducted from the payments to be made to suppliers in case of delayed delivery of goods or services.
b) Amount of Security deposit forfeited of suppliers due to non-fulfillment of certain contract conditions.
(d) Food and beverages supplied at industrial canteen inside the factory premises.
(e)Community hall (Multipurpose Hall) provided on rental basis to employees of our organization.
(f) School bus facility provided to children of the employees.
(g)Conducting exams for various vacancies.
Answer: The Appellant is not liable to pay GST in any of these abovementioned activities/transactions carried out by them.
Question: 2) Whether Input Tax Credit on expenditure on the goods and services consumed by our organisation in following activities shall be available: –
a) Maintenance of garden inside the factory premises.
b) Maintenance and upkeep activities relating to gardens, parks, playground, factory school for children of employees, hall for recreational activities, residential quarter buildings of employees, roads, footpaths, street lightings and other parts of estate area that are located outside the factory premises but within the factory estate.
c) Medicines purchased by the hospital maintained by our organisation and used for treatment of factory employees and their dependents. Expenditure on maintenance, upkeep and other activities relating to such hospital.
d) Expenditure related to maintenance and upkeep of guest houses maintained by organisation.
e) Expenditure related to purchase of LPG cylinders used within industrial canteen.
Answer: ITC in respect of the following input services are available to the Appellant:
(a) Maintenance of garden inside the factory premises;
(c) Medicines purchased by the hospital maintained by our organisation and used for treatment of factory employees and their dependents. Expenditure on maintenance, upkeep and other activities relating to such hospital.
ITC in respect of the following input services are not available to the Appellant:
(b) Maintenance and upkeep activities relating to gardens, parks, playground, factory school for children of employees, hall for recreational activities, residential quarter buildings of employees, roads, footpaths, street lightings and other parts of estate area that are located outside the factory premises but within the factory estate.
(d) Expenditure related to maintenance and upkeep of guest houses maintained by organisation.
(e) Expenditure related to purchase of LPG cylinders used within industrial canteen.
Question: 6) Whether proportionate Input Tax Credit has to be reversed in cases where lesser payment is made to the supplier due to deduction on account of liquidated damages from supplier’s dues.
Answer: No, the Appellant is not required to reverse any proportionate Input Tax Credit in cases where lesser payment is made to the supplier due to deduction on account of liquidated damages from supplier’s dues.
Question: 7) Being a part of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, whether the following notifications are applicable to our organisation and what shall be the impact of such notifications: –
d) Notification No. 2/2018- Central Tax (Rate), in relation to services by an arbitrator or an advocate to our organisation.
e) Notification No. 3/2018- Central Tax (Rate), in relation to services supplied by our organisation by way of renting of immovable property to a person registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
f) Notification No. 36/2017 – Central Tax (Rate), in relation to payment of tax on reverse charge mechanism on sale of used vehicles, seized and confiscated goods, old and used goods, waste and scrap to a GST registered person.
Answer: Yes, all the three aforementioned notifications will be applicable to Ordnance Factory Bhandara.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: JSW Energy Ltd. dated: 13.01.2020
Query:
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling is, hereby, held that the proposed arrangement of supply of coal or any other inputs by the principal i.e. JSL to the Appellant i.e. JEL for generation of electricity will be construed as job work. Accordingly, no GST will be leviable on this supply. Further, the supply of power by JEL to JSL, being an exempt supply, will attract nil rate of GST. Finally, the job work charges payable to JEL by JSL will be subjected to GST in terms of the provisions laid out in Notification No.11/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended by various subsequent notifications.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: SAFSET AGENCIES PVT LTD. dated: 07.10.2019
Query: Classification, valuation and GST rates
The Appellate authority held that the Appellant is eligible to take benefit of rule 32(5) for the products in TABLE 1 placed by them before us except items placed at 7 & 8.CollectiblesCollectible Books We cannot give any ruling on items 7 & 8 and we agree with the observations of the AAR on 7 & 8, that in absence of any specific description of the products contained in them, no ruling can be given.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Arihant Enterprises dated: 09.09.2019
Query: Classification of the activities ‘ice-cream sold from the natural outlets‘
For the reasons recorded in the text part, the instant appeal is allowed. The order passed by the ARA is declared void ab-initio as it was vitiated by the process of suppression of material facts.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Lions club of Poona Kothrud dated: 23.04.2019
Query: Amount collected by individual Lions clubs and Lions District is for convenience of Lion members and pooled together only for paying Meeting expenses & communication expenses and the same is deposited in single bank account. As there is no furtherance of business in this activity and neither any services are rendered nor are any goods being traded. Whether registration is required
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling set aside the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority and subsequently held that the respondent i.e. Lions Club of Poona Kothurd, on account of the acitivities undertaken by them, liable for taking registration for discharging their GST liability.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Western Concessions Private Limited dated: 07.10.2019
Query: Whether the appellants would be eligible to avail the ITC of GST paid on goods and services used for construction of Tie-in pipelines, from the FSRU to the National grid.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, , modified the ruling pronounced by the Advance Ruling Authority in so far the observation of the facts and legal provisions are concerned and pass the order by holding that the Appellant is not entitled to avail the ITC of GST paid on goods and services used for construction of Tie-in pipelines, from the FSRU to the National grid as per the provision laid out in section 17(5)(c) and 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act, 2017.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Siemens Limited dated: 23.08.2019
Query: a) a. Whether the freight charges recovered by the Appellant under the aforesaid contract from the customer without issuance of consignment note will be eligible for exemption.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held as under:
From the conjoined and harmonious reading of various clauses of Third contract and Fifth contract awarded to the appellant and their interdependency under the whole contract comprising of six contracts, it can be safely concluded that the agreement for setting up for + 320KV, 2 X1000MW VSC based HVDC Terminals and DC XLPE Cable system between Pugalur and North Trichur associated with HVDC Bipole link between Western region (Raigarh, Chhattisgarh) and Southern region (Pugalur, Tamil Nadu-North Trichur, Kerala) is a composite works contract as defined u/s 2(119) of GST Act and taxable @ 18% and hence –
i. The transportation services provided by the appellant being part of the whole works contract will be taxable @ 18% as works contract services and will not be eligible for the exemption as provided in Serial no. 18 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated the 28th June, 2017 and Notification No. 12/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated the 29th June, 2017.
ii. Order passed by the Maharashtra Advance Ruling Authority Order No. GST-ARA-69/2018-19/B-164, Mumbai dated December 19, 2018 is confirmed.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Tata Motors Limited dated: 20.09.2019
Query: For the purpose of Cess @ 22% under Sr. No. 52B of Cess Rate Notification, whether the ground clearance of the vehicle is to be considered in laden condition or in unladen condition?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling set aside the ruling pronounced bh the Advance Ruling Aothority, holding that for the purpose of Cess @ 22% under Sr. No. 52B of Cess Rate Notification, the ground clearance of the vehicle is to be considered in laden condition only, and accordingly, the vehilce whose ground clearance in unladen condition is more than 170mm but below 170mm in laden condition, will not get covered under Sr. No. 52B of Cess Rate Notification.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Asstt. Commissioner, Division-IV, CGST, Pune-II Commissionerate as the Appellant and M/s. Lions Club of Poona Kothurd as the Respondent in the matter. dated: 14.08.2019
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling amended the para 19 of the original AAAR Order No. MAH/AAAR/SS-RJ/32/2018-19 dated 23.04.2019 in as much as the membership fee, collected by the Respondent from its members, will not construed as consideration for levy of GST; rather it is the registration fee, collected by the Respondent from its members for organising the skill oriented workshops, will be construed as consideration against the supply made by the Respondent to its members, and accordingly will be leviable to GST, while maintaining that Lions Club of Poona Kothrud, on account of the activities i.e. organising training programs/workshops for its members, is liable to take registration for discharging their GST liability.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Commissioner , CGST & C.Ex. Mumbai East as Appellant and NES Global Specialist Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. as the Respondent dated: 02.08.2019
Query: Transaction in Question was a zero rated supply or a normal Supply? If it a Zero Rated Supply , then whether the same could be considered as an export of Service under GST Act?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that since, the questions raised by the Appeallant is not covered under our scope and jurisdiction, therefore, no ruling can be passed in the instant matter.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Segoma Imaging Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. dated: 03.04.2019
Query: Export of services
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that since, the questions raised by the Appeallant is not covered under our scope and jurisdiction, therefore, no ruling can be passed in the instant matter.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Micro Instruments dated: 22.03.2019
Query:
Whether the “Commission” received by the Applicant in the convertible foreign exchange for rendering services as an “Intermediary” from overseas clients, on account of-
a. Trade in goods between an exporter abroad receiving such services and an Indian importer of goods, is an “export of services” falling under Section 2(6) & outside the purview of Section 13(8) (b), attracting zero-rated tax under Section 16 (1) (a) of the IGST ACT, 2017
b. If the answer to the question above is in the negative, whether the impugned supply of service forming as integral part of the cross-border sales/purchase of goods, will be treated as an “intra -state supply” under Section 8(1) of the IGST Act read with Section 2(65) of the MGST Act. Attracting CGST/MGST? And at what rate?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that since, the questions raised by the Appeallant is not covered under our scope and jurisdiction, therefore, no ruling can be passed in the instant matter, and therefore, the ruling passed by the Advance Ruling Authority is hereby quashed.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Rotary Club of Mumbai Nariman Point dated: 11.12.2019
Query: a) Whether contributions from the members in the Administration Account, recovered for expending the same for the weekly and other meetings and other petty administrative expenses incurred including the expenses for the location and light refreshments, amounts to or results in a supply, within the meaning of supply?
b) If answer to question no. 1 is affirmative, whether it will be classified as supply of goods or services?
c) Whether the applicant would be a Taxable Person under the provisions of the Act?
d) If answer to question no.3 is affirmative, who shall be person responsible under GST, as office bearers keep on changing every year?
e) Whether the said collection of funds under common pool and spending back on the same said contributors, would entail ‘supply’ as defined in the law.
f) If answer to Question no.5 is affirmative, whether the same would be supply of goods or services?
The Appellate authority set aside the Order of the AAR and hold that the amount collected as membership subscription and admission fees from members is not liable to GST as supply of services.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd dated: 25.10.2019
Query: Classification of Prohance D (Chocolate)
The Appellate authority set aside the Order of the AAR classifying the product Prohance-D (Chocolate) under heading 21069050 and furhter held that the product would instead classify as a diabetic food covered under chapter heading 21069091
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Commissioner, CGST & C.Ex. Mumbai East as the Appellant and Asahi Kasei Pvt. Ltd. As the respondnet. dated: 19.06.2019
Query: 1) Whether the service supplied by the Respondent under the Service Agreement dated 1 March 2013 constitute a supply of “Support Services” falling under HSN code 9985 or “Intermediary service” classifiable under HSN code 9961/9962?
2) Whether the service supplied by the Respondent under the Marketing Services Agreement dated 1 December 2012 constitute a supply of “Support services” falling under HSN code 9985 or “Intermediary service” classifiable under HSN code 9961/9962?
3) Whether the service provided by the Respondent is an export of services as defined under Section 2(6)
In reply to the quesitons raised by the Appellant before AAAR, The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held as under:The service supplied by the Respondent under the Service Agreement dated 1 March 2013 constitute a mixed supply of services falling under the Heading “ accounting services” having SAC 9982, and under the Heading “other professional, technical and business services” having the SAC 9983.
The service supplied by the Respondent under the Marketing Services Agreement dated 1 December 2012 constitute a mixed supply of Services falling under the Heading “Research and Development services” having SAC 9981, under the Heading “Other professional, technical and business services” bearing SAC 9983, and under the Heading “other miscellaneous services” bearing SAC 9997. 3.We cannot pass any ruling in relation to the export of services, as the same would require the determination of the place of supply of services, which is not under the jurisdiction and scope of the Advance Ruling Authority.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Sabre Travel Network India Pvt. Ltd. dated: 10.04.2019
Query: “Whether the marketing, promotion and distribution services (hereinafter referred to as the “Said Services”) provided by Sabre India to Sabre APAC would be subject to tax under the Central Goods & Services Tax Act 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods & Services Tax Act 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ” Said Tax Acts “) or would remain excluded under the said Acts as the said activities qualify as export of Service in accordance to Section 2(6) of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 read with the said Tax Acts?”
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that the entire gamut of activities of the Appellant is in the nature of the composite supply, of which intermediary services is the principal supply. Further, as regards the services provided by the Appellant to their Client, namely Sabre APAC is export or otherwise, we hold that we do not have jurisdiction to decide the place of supply of service, which is one of the pre requisites to determine the export of services in terms of Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017 and hence we cannot pass any ruling in respect of the same.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Crown Beers India Pvt Ltd dated: 09.04.2019
Query: Question 1.:- The applicant incurs to the PIL a fixed fee and costs specified in Schedule II to the Agreement as a consideration for supply of Products. Supply of Products, being in the nature of alcoholic liquor for human consumption. Whether GST can be levied on the above mentioned consideration paid for supply of alcoholic liquor for human consumption?
Without prejudice to the submissions made elsewhere, if the supply of Beer is held to be a service by way of job work in relation to Beer, what shall be the rate of CGST/UTGST/IGST that shall be levied on the said taxable supply?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that the ruling pronounced by the Advance Ruling Authority in as much as the activities performed by the PIL, on the goods of the Appellant, are in the nature of the Job work and accordingly attract 18% GST.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Bhutoria Refrigeration Private Limited dated: 28.03.2019
Query: “Whether the Fan Coil Unit is covered under HSN Code 8418 under Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017”.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that the Fan described under 8414 do not at all have any resemblance with a FCU. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that FCU will be covered by heading 8414.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Bajaj Finance Limited dated: 14.03.2019
Query: Whether the Bonus Charges collected should be treated as a supply in GST?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that the bounce charges recovered by the Appellant from their borrowers on account of the default of the borrowers, where their repayment instruments get dishonored due to lack of the sufficient fund in their bank account, will attract GST.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Bajaj Finance Limited dated: 14.03.2019
Query:
Whether the Penal Interest is to be treated as interest for the purpose of exemption under Sr. No. 27 of Notification No. 12/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, Sr. No. 27 of Maharashtra State Notification No. 12/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 29.06.2017, and Sr. No. 28 of Notification No. 9/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017?
ii) If the answer to the above is negative, whether the activity of collecting penal interest by the Applicant would amount to a taxable supply under the GST regime?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that the penal charges / penalty recovered by the Appellant from their borrowers on account of the delay in payment of EMI by borrowers are adequately covered under clause 5 (e) of the Schedule II of the CGST Act, and will attract GST.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: H.P. Sales India Pvt. Ltd. dated: 17.02.2019
Query:
Ink supplied along with consumables under GST
Question 2. Determination of time and value of supply of Electro Ink with consumables under the indigo press contract
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Kolte Patil Developers Ltd. dated: 11.04.2019
Query:‘What is the legal procedure for cancellation of flat which is booked in pre-GST Regime and cancelled in post-GST Regime. Also, GST liability in cases where some small amount is retained, for cancellation
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that since the Appellant has raised questions on the admissibility of the credit of the service tax and VAT paid under the pre-GST regime, it is held that neither AAR nor AAAR has the jurisdiction to pass any ruling on such matters
To download Please Click HERE
Case: VServglobal Pvt. Ltd. dated: 26.02.2019
Query: whether the aforesaid services proposed to be rendered qualify as ‘Zero Rated Supply in terms of Section 16 of the Integrated Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 or not.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that the services being offered by Appellant is a package of services, which is nothing but a composite supply, of which the principal supply is that of intermediary services.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Space age syntex Pvt. Ltd. dated: 13.02.2019
Query: Whether GST is applicable on Sale and or purchase of DFIA Item?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling set aside the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that No GST is applicable on the sale or purchase of DFIA, as provided in Sr. 122A of the Notification 02/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended by the Notification No. 35/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 13.10.2017.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: IMS Proschool Pvt. Ltd. dated: 04.2.2019
Query:
Q.1. Whether educational courses offered by the Applicant, which have been approved by NSDC, would be construed as in relation to National Skill Development Programme implemented by NSDC?
Q.2. The Applicant offers certain educational courses for which qualification standards / framework i.e. QP/ NOS have not been defined by NSDC and will be approved by NSDC as and when the relevant QP/ NOS would be defined by NSDC. In the interim period, NSDC has given exceptional approval on such courses. Till the time QP/ NOS are defined for such educational courses and are eventually approved by NSDC, whether such courses will be treated as in relation to National Skill Development Programme implemented by NSDC?
Q.3. In certain situations, NSDC approved educational courses are subsequently upgraded by the Applicant within pre-defined QP/ NOS framework, by way of adding more topics/ contents /modules. However, such modified version of NSDC approved educational courses have not been approved by NSDC yet. Whether such modified version will be treated as in relation to National Skill Development Programme implemented by NSDC?
Q.4. If the answer to Q.1, Q.2 and Q.3 is Yes, then whether the benefit of GST exemption as per Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate), dated the 28th June 2017 would be available to the Applicant?
Q.5. If answer to Q.4 is yes, whether benefit of GST exemption as per Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate), dated the 28th June 2017 would be still available if such educational courses are offered to corporate and business institutions?
Q.6. Whether the NSDC approved educational courses which are actually imparted by the business partners of the Applicant, on behalf of the Applicant as sub-contractor of Applicant, at various centres located across the country, will be considered as offered by the Applicant?
Q.7. If answer to Q.6 is Yes, whether benefit of GST exemption as per Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate), dated the 28th June 2017 would be available to the Applicant?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that since they are not providing any services in relation to the NSDC programme implemented by the NSDC, they are not elgible for the exemption provided in the entry 69 of the Notification No. 12/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Shree Construction dated: 03.01.2019
Query: a) What tax rate to be charged by the sub-contractor to the main contractor on Works Contract Service Pertaining to railway original Work Contract
b) GST is 12% or 18%
The Advance Ruling Authority upheld the order passed by the Advance Ruling Authority, by observing that the any works contract pertaining to the railways, carried out by the main contractor or its sub-contractors are eligible for the concessional rate of 12% GST in terms of the provisions of the item (v) of the Notification No. 11/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/sShrimad Rajchandra Adhyatmik Satsang Sadhana Kendra dated: 24.12.2018
Query: Question 1:- Whether the applicant which is a charitable trust with the main object of advancement of religion, spirituality or yoga can be said to be in business so as to attract the provisions
Question 2:- Whether the applicant which is a charitable trust with main object of the advancement of religion, spirituality or yoga is liable to registration under the provisions of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017
Question 3:- Whether sales of spiritual products which is incidental / ancillary to main charitable object of the applicant can be said to be business of the applicant in terms of the definition in Section 2(17) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 and option provision of Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act 2017?
Question 4:- Whether the sale of spiritual products can be said to be supply under Section 7 of the Central General Sales Tax Act, 2017 and equivalent provision of the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 so as to attract GST?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that the activities carried out by them would fall under the definition of business as defined under the Section 2(17) of the CGST Act, 201, and accordingly, they are liable for registration under the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and the MGST Act, 2017. The Appellate Authority further observed that the sale of spiritual products which are incidental and ancillary to main charitable object of the appellant can be said to be business as defined under Section 2(17) of the CGST Act, 2017.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: A.S. Moloobhoy Pvt. Ltd. dated: 14.02.2019
Query: Whether the supply of Global Positioning System, Echo Sounder, Radio Detecting and Ranging, Electronic Charts Display & Information System, Gyroscope, Automatic Identification System, Doppler Speed Log, Medium/High Frequency Communication, Very High frequency, Satellite Communication/FIeet Broad band, Ship Security Alert System, Navigational Telex, Emergency Positioning Indicating radio Beacon, Voyage Data Recorder, Non Directional Beacon, Fish Finder, Sound Navigation and Ranging, Life saving/ Fire Fighting Appliances, Bridge Navigation Watch Alarm System, Search and Rescue Transponder, Anemometer and Walkie talkie is classifiable as “Parts of goods of headings 8901, 8902, 8904, 8905, 8906, 897” under entry 252 of Schedule 1 of CST Notification No. 01/2017-Central tax (rate) dated 28th June, 2017 as amended and liable to GST @ 5% (CGST-2.5% and SGST-2.5%) or IGST @ 5% or not.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling modify the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that Automatic Identification System (AIS), NAVTEX, and SART are covered by Sr. 252 of Notification No. 1/2017 -C.T. (Rate).
To download Please Click HERE
Case: IL & FS Education & Technology Services Ltd. dated: 04.02.2019
Query: Determining applicability of Entry No. 72 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated the 28th June 2017 read with Entry No. 72 of Notification No. 12/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 29.06.2017 to the services provided by the Applicant under the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) @ School Project.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling set aside the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by holding that the supply of goods and services by the Appellant to the Director of Education (S & HS) qualifies for exemption in term of the Entry No. 72 of the Notification No. 12/2017 -C.T. (Rate).
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Jotun India Pvt. Ltd. dated: 05.02.2019
Query: Marine paints manufacture by the appellant will not be covered under Sl. No. 252 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as the same can not be considered as part of the ship as contended by them.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that marine paints manufacture by the appellant will not be covered under Sl. No. 252 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017as the same can not be considered as part of the ship as contended by them.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Taraltec Solutions Pvt. Ltd. dated: 04.02.2019
Query: a) Classification of Reactor used in Hand Pumps for water disinfection
b) Applicable GST Rate
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that the Reactor manufactured by M/s. Taraltec Solutions Private Limited will be classified under the HSN 8413 91 instead of the HSN 8421 21 90 which is subject to 18% GST i.e.(CGST 9% + SGST 9 %).
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s.Nutan warehousing Company Pvt. Ltd. dated: 10.12.2018
Query: Whether the supply of warehouse services used for packing & storage of tea, under above mentioned facts & circumstances was/is exempted vide Serial No 54(e) of Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) or otherwise.”
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Advance Ruling Authority by observing that the benefit of the exemption granted vide Serial No 54(e) of Notification No. 12/2017- Central tax (rate) is not available to the appellant as the products being stored in the warehouses by the appellant’s client are not the agricultural produce.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Merit Hospitality Services Pvt. Ltd. dated: 01.11.2018
Query: a) Is GST is applicable on the compensation for alternative accommodation to be paid to tenant by the developer or owner
b) Is GST is applicable on the compensation for alternative accommodation\damage for the delayed handover of the possession of the new premises to be paid to tenant.
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling held that the services of supplying food by the appellant to the employees of the unit located in the Special Economic Zone is not covered under the zero rated supplies in terms of Section 16(1)(b) of the IGST Act, 2017 and the services of the appellant are also not in the nature of restaurant services in SEZ as claimed by the appellant.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: Five Star Shipping dated: 23.10.2018
Query:
A.1 Whether Marine Consultancy Service (“MCS”) provided to foreign ship owners constitutes “composite supply” with the principal supply of consultancy service?
A.2 Whether the place of supply of MCS (as a composite supply) will be determined in terms of Section 13(2)(a) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax, 2017 (“IGST Act”), i.e. the ‘location of recipient of service’?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling modified the ruling pronounced by the Authority for Advance Ruling holding that entire gamut of services performed by the Appellant are in fact of the composite supply of the intermediary services, classified under the Service Accounting Code 999799, which is other miscellaneous services, and the accounting services under the SAC 998222, of which the intermediary service is the principal supply.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Ahmednagar District Goat Rearing and Processing Co-Op Federation Ltd. dated: 11.09.2018
Query: Q.1 Whether the whole (Sheep/Goat) animal carcass in its natural shape in frozen state in different weight and size packed in LDPE bags without mentioning the weight and one or two such LDPE bags further packed in HDPE bags being supplied to Army by applicant against tender shall qualify as product put up in “unit container”?
Q.2 Whether the products as mentioned in query 1 shall be taxable under GST as per entry no. 4 of schedule II of the Notification no. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 upto 14th November 2017 and thereafter as per entry no. 1 of schedule I of the Notification No. 43/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 14th November 2017 or fall under exemption list as per entry no 10 of Notification No. 2/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) New Delhi dated 28th June 2017 upto 14th November 2017 and thereafter as per entry no. 9 of the Notification No. 44/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 14th November 2017?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling set aside the Advance Ruling Authority Order and further held on the basis of the available records , that the whole (Sheep/Goat) animal carcass in its natural shape in frozen state in different weight and size packed in LDPE bags without mentioning the weight and one or two such LDPE bags further packed in HDPE bags being supplied to Army by appellant against tender shall not qualify as product put up in “Unit Container”, .
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited dated: 11.09.2018
Query:
Question 1 Whether GST is applicable on Liquidated Damages in case of Operation & Maintenance activities and Construction of new power plants or renovation of old plants Or is applicable in both cases?
Question 2 GST is applicable, kindly clarify the following related aspects also Whether the GST on Liquidated Damages is covered under Schedule II entry No 5(2) (e) vide HSN code 9997-Other services rate 18% is correct or any other entry is relevant?
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Authority for Advance Ruling holding the activities (Supply of Solar Power Genration Plant and the installation thereof) of the Appellant as works contract.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Giriraj Renewables Private Limited dated: 05.09.2018
Query: Composite Supply
The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling upheld the ruling given by the Authority for Advance Ruling holding the activities (Supply of Solar Power Genration Plant and the installation thereof) of the Appellant as works contract.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Fermi solar Farms Pvt. Ltd. dated: 04.09.2018
Query: Q.1 Whether in case of separate contracts for supply of goods and services for a solar power plant, there would be separate taxability of goods as ‘solar power generating system’ at 5% and services at 18%?
Q.2 Whether parts supplied on standalone basis (when supplied without PV modules) would also be eligible to concessional rate of 5% as parts of solar power generation system?
The order of Authority for Advance Ruling holding that PVC floor Mat would fall in the Customs Tariff Heading 3918 attracting GST@18%(9% each of CGST and SGST), is upheld. However, this order is restricted to the types of PVC floor coverings/Mats being manufactured by the Appellant as per the manufacturing process submitted and whose sample was produced before the Authority.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. National Plastics Industries Ltd., Mumbai dated: 2018-19
Query: Classification of PVC Floor mat and the applicable rate of GST
The order of Authority for Advance Ruling holding that PVC floor Mat would fall in the Customs Tariff Heading 3918 attracting GST@18%(9% each of CGST and SGST), is upheld. However, this order is restricted to the types of PVC floor coverings/Mats being manufactured by the Appellant as per the manufacturing process submitted and whose sample was produced before the Authority.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. CMS Info Systems Ltd. dated: 06.08.2018
Query:
1. Whether supply of such motor vehicles as scrap after its usage can he treated as ‘supply’ in the course or furtherance of business and whether such transaction would attract GST? If yes, please provide the rate of GST and/or Compensation Cess.
2. If the answer to Question 1 is in affirmative, whether Input tax Credit is available to CMS Info Systems Ltd. (‘CMS’ or ‘the applicant’) on purchase of motor vehicles i.e. cash carry vans which are purchased, used for cash management business and supplied post usage as scrap?
The Appellate Authority held that, as the law now stands, Input Tax Credit is not available to CMS Info Systems Limited on purchase of motor vehicles i.e. cash carry vans, which are purchased and used for cash management business and supplied post usage as scrap.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. dated: 03.08.2018
Query: Input Tax Credit
The Appellate Authority held that the accumulated credit by way of Krishi Kalyan Cess (KKC) as appeared in the Service tax return of Input Service Distributor (ISD) on June 30, 2017 which is carried forward in the electronic credit ledger maintained by the Appellant under CGST Act 2017, shall not be allowed to be taken as admissible input tax credit. Accordingly the order of AAR stands confirmed in terms of the above order
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Hafele India Pvt. Ltd. dated: 02.08.2018
Query: Classification of Caesarstone
The appellate authority confirmed the ruling pronounced by the Authority for Advance Ruling holding that Caesarstone imported by the Applicant is to be classified under HSN code 6810.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: JSW Energy Limited dated: 02.07.2018
Query: Applicability of GST
a) Supply of Coal or any other inputs on a job work basis by JSL to JEL
b) Supply of power by JEL to JSL
c) Job Work Charges payable to JEL by JSL
The processing undertaken by a person on the goods belonging to another registered person qualifies as job work even if it amounts to manufacture provided all the requirements under the CGST/MGST Act in this behalf, are met with. The transaction between the Appellant and M/s JSL does not qualify for Job Work under Section 2(68) and Section 143 of the said Acts.
To download Please Click HERE
Case: M/s. Aditya Birla Retail Ltd. dated: 07.08.2018
Query: Whether the subject goods, proposed to he sold under Stream 1 (refer Annexure I), where the package of the subject goods would merely have a declaration mentioning the name and registered address of the Applicant as the manufacturer, as per the statutory requirement under Subject Statutory Provisions, can be considered as ‘not hearing a brand name, and, accordingly eligible for exemption from GST in terms of relevant entries to Notification No. 2/2017 Central tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 (‘CGST Notification’), and, the corresponding entries under Notification No. 2/2017-Integrated tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 (‘IGST Notification’) and Notification No. 2/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 29th June 2017) ]collectively referred to as ‘the Exemption Notifications’]?
Whether the subject goods proposed to he sold under Stream 2 (refer Annexure I), where the package of the subject goods would have a declaration mentioning the name and registered address of the manufacturer as per the statutory requirement under the Subject Statutory Provisions as also the declaration ‘Marketed by- Aditya Birla Retail Limited’ can he considered as ‘not bearing a brand name’, and, accordingly eligible for exemption in terms of relevant entries to the Exemption Notifications?
Whether the declarations made on the package, by inter alia using common/generic terms viz. ‘Value’, ‘Daily’, `Superior’ and ‘Choice’, for the sole purpose of indicating the quality of the product so as to enable the customers to identify and buy products based on their requirements, budget and preferences can he construed to he a ‘brand name’ for the purpose of the Exemption Notifications?
In respect of point (i) of Prayer to the grounds of Appeal, the Appellate Authority did not find any infirmity with the ruling given by Authority for Advance Ruling in this behalf for Question No. 1 posed before them.In respect of point (ii) of Prayer to the grounds of Appeal, the appellate authority held that the use or words ‘VALUE’,‘CHOICE’ or‘SUPERIOR’ on the proposed packing, without altering the surrounding environment to take advantage of brand ‘MORE’, would be construed as ‘brand name’ for the purpose of Exemption Notification.
