(1) Whether applicant is liable to pay tax on amounts which it collects from its members for setting up a corpus fund for future contingencies/ major CAPEX. (2) Whether the applicant is liable to pay tax on collection of common area electricity charges paid by the members and the same is recovered on the actual electricity charges?
Determination of correct classification of clear Float Glass
We uphold the Advance Ruling Order No.KAR ADRG 30/2023 dated 15.09.2023 and dismiss the appeal filed by M/s. J.B.Exhibitors on all counts
Whether the applicant being a Fair Price Shop is liable to charge GST from the State Government against the supply made by them and whether the supply of S.K.Oil along with charges like dealer's commission, dealera's transport charges, stationary charges, H & E losses etc. would be treated as a composite supply wherein the principal supply would be the supply of S.K.Oil.
Whether the product 'Jac Olivol Body Oil' intended to be manufactured and sold by the applicant shall fall under HSN 3004 or under HSN 3304 of the GST Tariff.
The Ruling of AAR, Rajasthan dated 17.06.2022 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the AAR to decide the application afresh after considering the judgement dated 21.04.2023 of Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta delivered in the case M/s Anmol Industries Ltd. Versus West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling, Goods and Service Tax.
The AAAR noted that the Appellant contended that the Advance Ruling was pronounced on 27.09.2021 on the basis of an amendment which was not operational as on the date of pronouncing Ruling. The AAAR felt that the AAR need to take note of the contention of the Appellant & pass a speaking order with reference to them. On being contended by the Appellant, the AAAR also noted that the decision was not taken by same members of AAR who have heard the case. This is a violation of the principles of natural justice.The AAAR ordered that the Ruling of the AAR, Rajasthan dated 27.09.2021 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to AAR to decide the application de-novo after considering all the contentions of the appellant.
The Appellant have withdrawn their appeal application as the GST Council had issued clarification and notification in respect of the question on which Advance Ruling was sought. In light of the withdrawal of the Appeal by the Appellant, the AAAR dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
The appeal filed by the Appellant, M/s.Arun cooling home was dismissed on the grounds of time limitation without going into the merits of the case.
The delay of 21 days in filing the appeal by the appellant beyond the normal time limit of 30 days is condoned in terms of proviso to section 100(2) of CGST Act,2017, and the appeal will be taken up for consideration on merits
