Software not admissible for Advance ruling if query already pending earlier than DGGSTI: AAR


Application - Advance ruling - question - DGGSTI - AAR - Taxscan

The Chennai Authority for Advance Ruling ( AAR ) has held that no Items and Providers Tax on printing of Pre and Put up-examination objects, and scanning and processing of outcomes.

The applicant, Trident Pneumatics (p) ltd, are an permitted vendor of the Indian Railways and is presently supplying a variety of merchandise. They’ve acquired orders for the manufacture and provide of Air Spring Failure Indication Cum Brake Software (FIBA) machine to the Railways. They suggest to Manufacture FIBA based mostly on design specs supplied by Indian Railways

The appliance was filed u/s 98 necessitating an Advance ruling on the classification of Spring Failure Indication cum Brake Software (FIBA) proposed to be manufactured and equipped solely to be used in Railways underneath Part XVII.

The Applicant has submitted the copy of the applying in Type GST ARA – 01 and likewise submitted a duplicate of Challan evidencing fee of software charges of Rs.5, OOO/- every underneath sub-rule (1) of Rule 104 of CGST guidelines 2017 and SGST Guidelines 2017.

The division has categorised the applicant’s product compressed Air Dryer underneath Chapter 84213990 and demanded a differential obligation of Rs.3,66,295/- the identical has been upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), Coimbatore. The applicant paid the confirmed demanded quantity together with curiosity. Additional, the DGGI, Coimbatore Zonal Unit, has issued an SCN requiring the applicant to categorise all merchandise equipped to Railways underneath chapter84 as a substitute of Chapter 86 and demanded about Rs.3 Crore being the differential obligation.

The Coram discovered that the classification of FIBA, manufactured and equipped to Indian Railways by the applicant has been part of the investigation proceedings underneath Authorisation for Inspection dated 01.05.2019 issued underneath Part 67 of the Act.

Shri T G Venkatesh, I.R.S., Further Commissioner and Smt. Ok Latha Joint Commissioner (ST) didn’t admit the applying filed u/s98(2) of the IGST Act for the reason that query raised was part of the proceedings of DGGSTI.

Subscribe Taxscan AdFree to view the Judgment

Help our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Observe us on Telegram for fast updates.




Supply hyperlink