Withdrawal of Advance Ruling Application — The Applicant has preferred an application seeking Advance Ruling on

Whether input tax credit can be claimed on works contract services when the output service is not for the purpose of sale but leasing out?

The applicant has opined that Section 17(5) goes against the spirit of Section 16(1) of CGST Act 2017 as it artificially disallows credit on certain items. The applicant has relied on the judgement of the Orissa High Court in the case Safari Retreats Private Limited Vs Chief Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax. The applicant has also stated that the issue was prevalent even in the erstwhile CENVAT Credit and the issue was clarified by CBEC vide circular No.98/ 1/2008 ST dated 04.01.2008 and it was stated that immovable property is neither ‘Service’ nor ‘goods’ and input credit cannot be taken. The applicant has further stated that it is an indisputable fact that the service provider cannot provide his service unless he owns or leases a building and hence eligibility of CENVAT credit on construction services has resulted into litigation.

The applicant vide her letter dated 16.01.2020 has stated that she had gone through the decision of the Hon’ble Authority for Advance Ruling in the case of Sree Varalakshmi Mahal LLP. Since the facts in the application filed by the applicant are similar to the case above, the applicant sought the permission of the Hon’ble authority for Advance Ruling to withdraw her application. — Kamalavadani Udayakumar, In Re.. [2020] 20 TAXLOK.COM 126 (AAR-Tamil Nadu)