KBL SPML JV, In re - Taxpublishers.in

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers 2024 TaxPub(GST) 872 (AAR-Karn) IN THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, KARNATAKA M.P. RAVI PRASAD & KIRAN REDDY T, MEMBER KBL SPML JV, In re KAR ADRG 44-1/2022 2 February, 2024 Represented by:. K J Kamath, Advocate & Authorised Representative ORDER Order Under section 98(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 and under section 98(4) Of The Kgst Act, 2017 M/s. KBL SPML Joint Venture (herein after referred to as 'Applicant'), C/o Workafella, 150,1, Infantry Road, Opp. Commissioner Office, Shivajinagar, Bengaluru-560001 had filed an application for advance ruling during 2022 with regard to the alleged pure services of Operation & Maintenance (O&M) of pumping stations and reservoirs at T K Halli, Harohalli and Tataguni supplied to M/s BWSSB, Bengaluru. 2. The applicant had sought advance ruling in respect of the question "Whether the transaction undertaken by the applicant is covered under the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017, amended by Notification No. 2/2018 dated 25-1-2018 and further Notification No. 16/2021 dated 18-11-2021." 3. The applicant had contended that the contractee BWSSB has been classified as Local Authority in their GST registration No. 29BLRA06245BlDJ, issued by GST Department and thus entry No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 exempts the supply of pure services to a local authority. 4. The AAR, Karnataka, after following the due principles of natural justice, rejected their application, vide ruling No. KAR ADRG 44/2022 dated 29-11-2022, in terms of Section 98(2) of the CGST Act 2017, basis the said application was not in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant, but in relation to a completed supply, provided by them and therefore the said application was beyond the jurisdiction of this Authority 8s liable for rejection, as specified under section 95(a) of the CGST Act 2017. 5. The applicant, aggrieved by the said ruling filed the Writ Petition No. 1119/2023 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, on the grounds that the opportunity to submit their arguments with regard to admissibility of the application was not given. The Writ Petition has been ordered on 12-4-2023 as under:- SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers 2024 TaxPub(GST) 872 (AAR-Karn)

IN THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, KARNATAKA

M.P. RAVI PRASAD & KIRAN REDDY T, MEMBER

KBL SPML JV, In re

KAR ADRG 44-1/2022

2 February, 2024

Represented by:. K J Kamath, Advocate & Authorised Representative

ORDER

Order Under section 98(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 and under section 98(4) Of The Kgst Act, 2017

M/s. KBL SPML Joint Venture (herein after referred to as 'Applicant'), C/o Workafella, 150,1, Infantry Road, Opp. Commissioner Office, Shivajinagar, Bengaluru-560001 had filed an application for advance ruling during 2022 with regard to the alleged pure services of Operation & Maintenance (O&M) of pumping stations and reservoirs at T K Halli, Harohalli and Tataguni supplied to M/s BWSSB, Bengaluru.

2. The applicant had sought advance ruling in respect of the question "Whether the transaction undertaken by the applicant is covered under the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017, amended by Notification No. 2/2018 dated 25-1-2018 and further Notification No. 16/2021 dated 18-11-2021."

3. The applicant had contended that the contractee BWSSB has been classified as Local Authority in their GST registration No. 29BLRA06245BlDJ, issued by GST Department and thus entry No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 exempts the supply of pure services to a local authority.

4. The AAR, Karnataka, after following the due principles of natural justice, rejected their application, vide ruling No. KAR ADRG 44/2022 dated 29-11-2022, in terms of Section 98(2) of the CGST Act 2017, basis the said application was not in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant, but in relation to a completed supply, provided by them and therefore the said application was beyond the jurisdiction of this Authority 8s liable for rejection, as specified under section 95(a) of the CGST Act 2017.

5. The applicant, aggrieved by the said ruling filed the Writ Petition No. 1119/2023 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, on the grounds that the opportunity to submit their arguments with regard to admissibility of the application was not given. The Writ Petition has been ordered on 12-4-2023 as under:-