Latest GST Judgments

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

The work undertaken by the applicant in the instant case is an original work which is incidental or meant predominantly for use for commerce, industry, or any other business or profession, therefore, benefit of concessional rate of GST will not allowed. The appeal filed by the appellant has no merits and rejected accordingly.

Classification of service— In the instant case, the appellant had requested for Ruling on whether the contracts entered into with AVVNL under two work orders combining of supply, erection, testing and commissioning of materials/ equipments for providing rural electricity infrastructure qualifies as a supply for work contract under Section 2 (119) of the CGST Act and if yes, whether such supply, erection, testing and commissioning of materials/ equipments for providing rural electricity infrastructure made to AVVNL would be taxable at the rate of 12% in terms of Sr. no 3 (vi)of Notification no. 11/2017- C.T.(Rate) as amended w.e.f. 25.01.2018. The only dispute to be decided is whether the said composite supply of works contract is covered under Entry No. 3 (vi)(a) of Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax(Rate) dated 28.06.2017(as amended) or not. Held that— we hold that the work undertaken by the applicant in the instant case is an original work which is incidental or meant predominantly for use for commerce, industry, or any other business or profession. Hence we hold that the work being undertaken by the Appellant is predominantly used for or incidental to the main activity of AVVNL i.e. transmission (sale) of electricity.