States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The appellant is a provider of pure labour service to its client. The appellant has been appointed as a sub-contractor to its client for completion of its project. The appellant raised bill along with GST @18% to its client. However, the client refused to pay the sum of GST to the appellant citing reason that the service is exempted vide Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017. The Appellant sought Advance Ruling on the following questions : 1. Whether Jal Jeevan Mission is correct in classifying the services provided to Government entities as exempted services? 2. Whether the services are exempted under Notification No. 12/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-06-2017? The AAR held that the applicant provides services to Webel Technology Limited and not to the Public Health Engineering Department, Government of West Bengal. The instant supply of services would not qualify to be an exempted supply under serial number 3 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017, as amended. The appellant filed appeal against the above ruling before the AAAR. RULING : As the appellant has failed to satisfy that, whether the applicant provides services to the Central Government, State Government or Union Territory or local authority, we refrain from further examining the admissibility of the condition, which pertains to whether the aforementioned services are in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G or to a municipality under article 243W of the Constitution of India, as it is mandatory to satisfy all three conditions as mentioned in paragraph 14 in order to qualify a service for exemption under serial number 3 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Cenral Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017, as amended. Thus, the supply of services under question would not qualify to be an exempted supply under serial number 3 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017, as amended. Webel Support Multipurpose Service Co-operative Society Ltd., In re (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 643 (AAR) States GST & VAT - Section 29—Cancellation of registration—Non-filing of returns—Assessee agreed to pay any revenue due—Validity of Harekrishna Sahoo v. State of West Bengal & Ors. (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 644 (Cal-HC) : 2025 TaxPub(GST) 665 (Cal-HC) States GST & VAT - Section 30—Revocation of cancellation of registration—Delay in filing application for revocation of cancellation—Assessee being ready to pay tax, interest, late fee, penalty and any other tax—Validity of Mamata Nayak v. Superintendent CGST (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 633 (Ori-HC) : 2024 TaxPub(GST) 3090 (Ori-HC) States GST & VAT - Section 30—Revocation of cancellation of registration—Delay in filing application for revocation of cancellation—Assessee being ready to pay tax, interest, late fee, penalty and any other tax—Validity of Panchmukhi Constructions v. CCT & GST (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 633 (Ori-HC) : 2024 TaxPub(GST) 3095 (Ori-HC) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Applicant is involved in assisting Municipal Corporation and municipal council for providing the property survey, numbering of properties, measurements and data collection. To evaluate the property taxation as per act, it sought an advance ruling in respect of the following questions : 1. Whether the services provided by the applicant are covered under Clause 1 & 2 of twelfth Schedule of Article 243W? 2. Whether the Services provided by the applicant fall under the Exemption Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28-6-2017 (Entry No. 3 of Exemption Notification) as amended from time to time as the services are in the nature of pure labour services? RULING : 1. The services supplied by the applicant are pure services provided to the local authority but not by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G of the Constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution. Hence, the provisions as per SI. No. 3 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017, as amended, do not apply to the services provided by the applicant. 2. The applicant is providing pure services (without the supply of goods), to the various Municipal Councils. We find that the said services are not in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G of the Constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution. Hence, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) Dated 28-6-2017, as amended, from time to time. Sthapatya Consultants (India) (P) Ltd., In re (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 630 (AAR) States GST & VAT - Section 30—Revocation of cancellation of registration—Delay in filing application for revocation of canellation—Assessee being ready to pay tax, interest, late fee, penalty and any other tax—Validity of Prakash Chandra Sahoo v. CT & GST Officer (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 634 (Ori-HC) : 2024 TaxPub(GST) 2654 (Ori-HC) : (2024) 104 GST 463 (Ori) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Applicant is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of real estate Re-development of old buildings. The applicant sought an advance ruling in respect of the following questions : 1. Is GST payable on area given free of cost (which will include following) to existing members in pursuance to development agreement, where development agreement is entered into on 2-9-2016 and amended subsequently by supplementary agreement on 1-12-2021 and 20-4-2024, respectively? n Area in lieu of existing area given n Additional area given n Amenities given n Parking area n Stamp duty & Registration borne by builder/developer? 2. Is GST payable on monetary consideration payable to existing members in terms of development agreement for residential apartment projects, in following form, where development agreement is entered into on 02-09-2016 and amended subsequently by supplementary agreement on 01-12-2021 and 20-04-2024, respectively? n Rent for alternate accommodation n Brokerage for alternate accommodation n Shifting charges n Corpus to existing members n Corpus to society? 3. What will be taxable value for levy of GST on area given free of cost to existing members (which will include following) in pursuance to development agreement, where development agreement is entered into on 02-9-2016 and amended subsequently by supplementary agreement on 1-12-2021 and 20-4-2024, respectively. n Area in lieu of existing area given n Additional area given n Amenities given n Parking area n Stamp duty & Registration borne by builder/developer. RULING : 1. As per Notification No. 06/2019-State Tax (Rate) dated 30-3-2019, GST liability payable, on development rights is to be paid by promoter (builder/developer) on the date of issuance of completion certificate for the project, where required, by the competent authority or on its first occupation, whichever is earlier. Therefore, the applicant was liable to pay GST. 2. The total consideration paid by the developer to the society in lieu for development rights is the free flats and the above mentioned charges. However, mere payments of monetary charges do not amount to supply of services on the part of the developer as he is paying these amounts. These amounts are in the form of consideration paid along with free units by the Developer for acquiring development rights from the Society. The taxation of development rights after 1-04-2019 is governed by entry 41A of NN 12/2017 CT(R) dated 28-6-2017. 3. The value of supply of the apartments to the existing members in lieu of the development right, is equivalent to sale of similar apartment sold by the developer to the independent buyers nearest to the date on which development right is transferred. Sharda Vastu Nirmitee (P) Ltd., In re (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 629 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Applicant is a promoter of residential real estate project named Ten X Habitat by Raymond Realty spread across 14 acres of land inter alia containing 10 towers (Towers A to H, J and K) each having 42-storeys consisting of residential apartments and some commercial units admeasuring not more than 15 per cent of the total carpet area of all the residential apartments in the said project and other common amenities such as club house, swimming pool, parking, etc. The applicant sought an advance ruling in respect of the following questions : “Whether the Applicant has the option to pay tax at the rate of 12 per cent (6 per cent CGST + 6 per cent MGST) with Input tax credit for supply of residential apartments in all its ten Aspirational towers in terms of item (ie) of Sl. No. of the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 as amended from time to time?” RULING : No, Applicant meets the criteria of ‘ongoing project’ as per the Notification No. 11/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 as amended from time to time, only in respect of projects A, B and C. Hence, tax rate prescribed for the item (ie) of Sl. No. 3 of the said Notification would be applicable only to the sale of apartments in towers A, B and C subject to the fulfillment of other conditions mentioned for the said item. Raymond Ltd., In re (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 628 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The PPD group, of which the Applicant is an affiliate, is a Clinical Research Organization and provides clinical research services to pharmaceutical and biotech companies (Sponsors) on a global basis. These clinical trial management services comprise of consultancy, project management, data collection and specialist ancillary services. The applicant sought an advance ruling in respect of the following questions : 1. Whether the Applicant is entitled to take credit of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) paid by the Applicant under section 3 (7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 read with section 5(1) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the IGST Act”) while importing the sample drugs, in terms of section 16 (1) of the CGST Act? 2. Whether the Applicant is entitled to take credit of IGST paid by the “logistics service provider” (under DDP (Delivered Duty Paid) model of shipment) under section 3 (7) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 read with section 5(1) of the IGST Act while importing the sample drugs, in terms of section 16(1) of the CGST Act, where the Applicant is the Importer on Record? 3. Whether the Applicant is entitled to take credit of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) paid by the Applicant under section 7 read with section 9 of the CGST Act for the services of Customs House Agent received by the Applicant, in terms of section 16 (1) of the CGST Act? RULING : 1. Though section 16(1) provides for eligibility of input tax credit in respect of goods or services to be used in the course or furtherance of business, sub-section (5) of section 17 starts with non-obstante clause ‘Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1) of section 16 .... ‘ Hence, the drugs supplied are in the nature of free samples or supplies without consideration and input tax credit in respect of such goods would not be available under section 17(5)(h) of CGST Act. 2. Section 17(5) not only overcomes provisions of section 16(1), but it also provides that ITC shall not be available in respect of goods disposed of by way of gift or free samples. Since, the drugs supplied to hospitals are without consideration and acquires the colour of free sample or gift, any input services provided in respect of such disposal of goods would also be covered by the provisions of section 17(5)(h). Therefore, input tax credit in respect of the tax paid on CHA services or logistic services availed would not be available. 3. Further according to Circular 92/11/2019, it was clarified that free samples do not constitute a supply under GST, thereby not allowing for ITC on services used for such goods. Consequently, CHA charges, transportation attributable to free sample goods remain ineligible for ITC under current GST provisions. PPD Pharmaceutical Development India (P) Ltd., In re (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 627 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Applicant is engaged in the manufacture and sale of electronic weighing scales and systems under the brand name ‘Phoenix’. Among the product portfolio of the Applicant are two products, namely “Infantometer PIM-101” and “Stadiometer PSM-101”, which are growth monitoring devices which are manufactured using qualitative components and are integrated with advanced working mechanism, resulting in longer working life and accurate results. The applicant sought an advance ruling in respect of the following questions : 1. Whether Infantometer, being a diagnostic medical equipment, is covered under Tariff Heading 9018 and liable to GST @ 12%? 2. Whether Stadiometer, being a diagnostic medical equipment, is covered under Tariff Heading 9018 and liable to GST @ 12%? RULING : 1. Even though the said product is a measuring instrument, since it is predominantly and exclusively used only by medical professionals as a medical device or diagnostic instrument, it can be more appropriately classified as a diagnostic instrument rather than a measuring instrument and therefore will be appropriately classified under Chapter 9018. 2. The stadiometer supplied by the applicant is a measuring instrument, the primary and only function of which is to measure the height of children and adults. The purpose of determining the height may vary from situation to situation and may not be only medical. Therefore, the stadiometer is more appropriately classifiable as other general instruments used for measuring length and are rightly classifiable under Heading 90178090. Nitiraj Engineers Ltd., In re (2025) 124 ITPJ (SG) 626 (AAR)