GST ruling excludes Input Tax Credit on warehouse expenses.

The ruling held that Input Tax Credit (ITC) of GST paid on goods and services for warehouse construction and maintenance is not admissible under Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act 2017. The Authority rejected the applicant's arguments on double taxation and lack of competitiveness, emphasizing the clear provisions of the law. The decision is subject to provisions under section 103(2) unless declared void under Section 104(1) of the GST Act.

---

---

Issues:

1. Whether Input Tax Credit (ITC) of GST paid on goods purchased for construction & maintenance of Warehouse can be claimed in fullRs.
2. Whether ITC of GST paid on work contract service received for construction & maintenance of building can be claimed in fullRs.
3. Whether ITC of GST paid on goods purchased & works contract service received during FY 2017-18 for construction & maintenance of Warehouse can be claimed in fullRs.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1:
The applicant sought clarification on claiming ITC of GST paid on goods used for constructing and maintaining a warehouse for renting out. The Department's view was that as per Section 17(5)(d) of CGST Act 2017, no ITC is admissible on goods and services used in constructing a property for letting out. The applicant argued that denying ITC would lead to double taxation and be unconstitutional. The Authority analyzed the provisions of Section 16 and 17(5) of the CGST Act, concluding that ITC is not available on goods and services used in constructing an immovable property, as per Section 17(5)(d).

Issue 2:
Regarding the ITC of GST paid on work contract services for building construction and maintenance, the Authority held that no ITC is admissible under Section 17(5) of CGST Act 2017. The applicant's argument that denial of ITC would render the building uncompetitive was rejected, emphasizing that the law clearly states the inadmissibility of ITC in such cases.

Issue 3:
For the ITC of GST paid on goods and services during FY 2017-18 for warehouse construction, the Authority ruled that no ITC is admissible under Section 17(5) of CGST Act 2017. The applicant's plea that lack of clarity in the law should allow the ITC was dismissed, reiterating the clear provisions of the Act.

The ruling stated that ITC of GST paid on goods and services for warehouse construction and maintenance is not admissible under Section 17(5) of CGST Act 2017. The ruling's validity is subject to provisions under section 103(2) unless declared void under Section 104(1) of the GST Act.

This comprehensive analysis covers the issues raised, the arguments presented, and the final ruling by the Authority for Advance Ruling, Madhya Pradesh.

---