Creation and development of AAT
🔹 What is Advance Ruling?
An Advance Ruling is a written decision provided by the tax authority to an applicant on questions of law or fact regarding the supply of goods or services under GST. It provides legal clarity and reduces litigation.
🔹 Creation of AAR and AAAR under GST Law
➤ Legal Basis:
Sections 95 to 106 of the CGST Act, 2017
State GST Acts (mirror provisions)
➤ Composition:
AAR: One Central Tax officer and one State Tax officer.
AAAR: Two members — one from the Centre and one from the State (generally at Chief Commissioner level).
🔹 Purpose and Benefits
Provides clarity to taxpayers
Reduces litigation
Ensures uniformity in the implementation of GST
Boosts confidence of foreign investors or new businesses
🔹 Scope of Advance Ruling [Section 97(2)]
A taxpayer can seek an advance ruling on:
Classification of goods/services
Applicability of a notification
Determination of time and value of supply
Input Tax Credit (ITC) admissibility
Liability to pay tax
Requirement of registration
Whether an activity amounts to supply
🔹 Appeal Mechanism
If the applicant or the jurisdictional officer is aggrieved by the AAR's ruling, they can appeal to the AAAR within 30 days (extendable by another 30 days).
🔹 Important Case Laws on AAR and AAAR
1. M/s. Columbia Asia Hospitals Pvt. Ltd. (Karnataka AAR)
Issue: Whether sharing of employee services between two entities attracts GST.
Facts: Columbia Asia had employees at the head office managing branches. The cost of salaries was proportionally charged to other branches.
Ruling:
AAR held that even though there is no profit motive, cross-charge between distinct persons (branches in different states) is considered as supply under GST.
GST is applicable even on salary allocation.
Significance:
Established that employee cost cross-charged between branches is taxable.
Reinforced the concept of distinct persons under GST (as per Section 25(4)).
2. M/s. Macro Media Digital Imaging Pvt. Ltd. (Telangana AAR)
Issue: Classification of "printing services" — whether supply of goods or services.
Facts: The applicant was printing content on materials provided by customers (vinyl, cloth, etc.).
Ruling:
AAR held that this is a composite supply where the principal supply is a supply of service.
Significance:
Clarified the composite vs mixed supply issue.
Helped businesses in similar sectors understand their tax treatment.
3. M/s. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) (Karnataka AAAR)
Issue: Taxability of rent received from employees for residential quarters.
Facts: KPTCL provided residential quarters to employees and deducted nominal rent from salaries.
Ruling by AAR: GST is payable on such rent recovered.
AAAR Ruling:
Overturned AAR.
Held that the service of renting residential accommodation to employees is exempt under Entry 12 of Exemption Notification 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate).
Significance:
Provided relief to public sector undertakings.
Emphasized the social welfare angle in taxing employee benefits.
4. M/s. Tata Motors Limited (Maharashtra AAAR)
Issue: Whether distribution of promotional items to dealers is supply.
Facts: Tata Motors was distributing items like gold coins, air tickets, etc., under a dealer incentive scheme.
AAR Ruling:
Considered it as a supply of goods/services and liable to GST.
AAAR Ruling:
Upheld AAR ruling.
Held that free supplies in such schemes are not "gifts" but inducements related to business promotion, and hence taxable.
Significance:
Clarified treatment of dealer incentives.
Helped in interpreting the definition of "supply" in promotional schemes.
5. M/s. Sanjeev Sharma (Uttarakhand AAR)
Issue: Whether GST is applicable on renting of residential property to a proprietary firm.
Facts: A residential property was rented out to a firm (used for commercial purposes).
Ruling:
AAR held that since the property is rented to a business entity, it is taxable under GST, even if the property is residential.
Significance:
Emphasized that purpose of use (commercial or residential), not the nature of the property, determines taxability.
🔹 Key Challenges in AAR/AAAR System
Lack of Binding Precedents: Rulings are binding only on the applicant and jurisdictional officer.
Contradictory Rulings: Different AARs have given conflicting decisions for similar issues.
No National Appellate Authority initially: Especially problematic for companies operating in multiple states.
🔹 Recent Development: National Appellate Authority (NAAAR)
To resolve conflicting AARs across states, the GST Council approved the creation of a National Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (NAAAR) for distinct persons under Section 95 of CGST Act.
🔚 Conclusion
The AAR and AAAR mechanism has been a crucial tool in interpreting GST law. Though the system still faces consistency and jurisdictional issues, it has reduced ambiguity for taxpayers and improved compliance. The rulings like those of Columbia Asia, Tata Motors, and KPTCL highlight its practical importance and the evolving jurisprudence under GST.
RELATED Blog
0 comments