2022 (10) TMI 620 - AAR - GST

Maharashtra contractor must get separate GST registration in Odisha for railway works execution

The AAR Odisha ruled that a Maharashtra-based contractor executing railway works in Odisha must obtain separate GST registration in Odisha. The authority ... Requirement of separate registration is required in Odisha state - location of supplier - Whether E-tender document/LOA would suffice as address proof since nothing else is with the Applicant and service recipient will not provide any other proof? - Purchase of goods from a supplier of Maharashtra and shipment of goods directly from the premises of a supplier of Maharashtra to Odisha state - purchase of goods from a dealer of Odisha to use the goods in Odisha - Applicability of CGST & SGST or IGST by the supplier/dealer of Maharashtra. HELD THAT:- Location of supplier is usually where a supply is made from, a place mentioned as a principal place of business on the GST registration certificate. But in the instant case, clause (b) appears to be applicable to the Applicant for the location of supplier of services. The location of supplier seems to be at the project site, East Coast Railway, Odisha which is different from the place of business - The nature of supply is such that, it is not feasible to get it supplied from the State of Maharashtra. So an establishment is definitely required in the state of Odisha, where the work is being carried out. In the present case, we observe from the E-Tender documents of East Coast Railway that the Applicant shall, at its own expense, will provide it self with Sheds, Store houses and Yards in such situation and in such numbers as in the opinion of the Engineer is requisite for carrying on the works and the Applicant shall keep at each such sheds, storehouses and yards a sufficient quantity of materials. The Applicant has sub contracted some part of the work to M/s SRC Company Infra (P) Ltd, Hyderabad. The value of the contract accepted by the sub-contractor is Rs. 137,60,47,790 out of the total cost of the contract of Rs.337.18 Cr. - The Engineer’s representative shall have free access to the said sheds, storehouses and yards at any time for the purpose of inspecting the stock of materials. Further, the Applicant shall at its own cost provide and maintain suitable mortar mills, soaking vats or any other equipments Necessary for execution of the works. The Applicant is required to maintain suitable structures in terms of human and technical resources with sufficient degree of permanence at the sites of East Coast Railway, Odisha to effect supply of desired services as per the terms and conditions of the work order. It has to ensure provision of works contract service for the contract period, indicating sufficient degree of permanence to the human and technical resources employed at the sites. The Applicant through its expert belonging, therefore, is to supply the services at the site from the establishment as defined under section 2 (7) of the IGST Act. The location of the supplier should, therefore, be in Odisha in terms of section 2 (15) of the IGST Act - the Applicant is required to be registered under Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 in the State of Odisha for the works contract services to be provided to M/s East Coast Railway Odisha vide agreement under discussion. Issues Involved:1. Whether separate GST registration is required in Odisha state.2. Whether E-tender document/LOA would suffice as address proof.3. Tax implications on purchasing goods from Maharashtra and shipping directly to Odisha.4. Tax implications on purchasing goods from a dealer in Odisha for use in Odisha.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Separate GST Registration in Odisha:The primary issue addressed in the judgment is whether the Applicant is required to obtain a separate GST registration in Odisha for executing works contract services. The Applicant contended that since the place of supply is Odisha and the location of the supplier is Maharashtra, IGST should be charged, and no separate registration in Odisha is required. However, the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) concluded that the nature of the works contract necessitates a fixed establishment in Odisha. The contract involves substantial work, including the construction of major bridges and other allied works, which requires maintaining temporary site offices and deploying significant human and technical resources in Odisha. Therefore, the Applicant is required to be registered under the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for the works contract services provided to East Coast Railway, Odisha.2. E-tender Document/LOA as Address Proof:The Applicant queried whether the E-tender document/LOA would suffice as address proof for registration purposes. The AAR did not provide a ruling on this question, stating that it does not fall under the issues on which advance ruling can be sought under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017.3. Tax Implications on Purchasing Goods from Maharashtra and Shipping Directly to Odisha:Since the AAR concluded that the Applicant is required to obtain registration in Odisha, the questions regarding the tax implications on purchasing goods from Maharashtra and shipping directly to Odisha (whether CGST & SGST or IGST would be charged) were not addressed.4. Tax Implications on Purchasing Goods from a Dealer in Odisha for Use in Odisha:Similarly, the question regarding the tax implications on purchasing goods from a dealer in Odisha for use in Odisha (whether IGST or CGST & SGST would be charged) was also not addressed due to the affirmative answer to the first question.Conclusion:The AAR ruled that the Applicant is required to be registered under the Odisha GST Act and the Central GST Act for the works contract services provided in Odisha. The nature of the contract and the requirement to maintain a fixed establishment in Odisha necessitate such registration. The AAR did not provide a ruling on whether the E-tender document/LOA could be used as address proof for registration purposes, and the other tax implication questions were not addressed due to the affirmative ruling on the need for separate registration in Odisha.