Job work— The present appeal has been filed against the Advance Ruling order pronounced by the Odisha Authority for Advances Ruling (OAAR).

The Appellant approached to Honble Advance Ruling Authority, for getting an advance ruling on the following issues:-

(i) Whether sending of inputs (Naphtha, DM water, Power, Cooling water, service water and instrument air) by the Appellant to M/s. Praxair India Private Limited and receiving back of industrial gases (Hydrogen gas, Nitrogen gas and HP steam) under the lease agreement vail fall under ‘job work’ in terms of section 2(68) of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) and Odisha Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (OGST Act)?

(ii) Whether all the payments under the lease agreement will attract GST as applicable to Job Work?

Authority for Advance Ruling has pronounced the ruling as follows—

i) The activities being undertaken in the Appellant ‘s premises/production plant do not qualify for ‘Job work’ under section 2(68) of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) and Odisha Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (OGST Act) and Section 143 of said Acts.

ii) The Appellant ‘s next question “Whether all the payments under the contract will attract GST as applicable to Job work?” is not maintainable on the ground already stated.

The Advance Ruling Authority, odisha has observed that the activities undertaken by Praxair in the Appellant s’ premises on the input supplied by Appellant do not qualify for “Job work” on the following two grounds:-

i. That, there is no specific job work agreement between the Appellant and M/s Praxair. No job works charges or any processing /conversion charges of inputs have been claimed by M/s Praxair as evident from the invoices raised to the Appellant.

ii. That, the plant is not under the control and possession of M/s. Praxair India Private Limited.

Now the question before us to decide whether the operation carried out by M/s Praxair will be treated as job work or not, under the lease agreement, after taking into account of the submission made by the Appellant against the above two vital observations raised by the Advance Ruling Authority, Odisha.

As per Section 2(68) of CGST Act, 2017 read with section 143 of CGST Act, 2017 defines the meaning of the term ‘job work’ and explains ‘Job Work procedure’. However, on this procedural part as defined under the said provision, Advance Ruling Authority, Odisha has not raised any questions on the subject issue; But the Advance Ruling Authority, Odisha has objected that in addition to the procedural part, there should be specific “job work agreement” and “job work charges” should be clearly mentioned and raised in their invoices.

Therefore, It is our considered view that the activities undertaken in the Appellant ‘s premises or production plant do not qualify for ‘Job Work’ under section 2(68) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). In light of the above, we are of the opinion that the Ruling of the Advance Ruling Authority, Odisha, is in tune with legal provisions of the Act and it needs no interference. Therefore, we uphold the decision of the Advance Ruling Authority, Odisha,

Held that— This authority upholds the decision of the Advance Ruling Authority, Odisha.