2022 (11) TMI 257 - AAR - GST

Registered person must pay GST under reverse charge for transport and security services despite manufacturing exempted goods under HSN 23099020.

In Re: M/s. Innovative Nutrichem Pvt. Ltd.,

The AAR held that a registered person receiving goods transport agency and security services must pay GST under reverse charge mechanism despite being a ... Levy of GST - services procured from the respective service providers being the manufacturer and supplier of exempted goods falling under HSN 23099020 - Reverse Charge Mechanism - HELD THAT:- The applicant, admittedly is a registered person under GST Act and located in the taxable territory. They are the recipients of the services of the Goods Transport Agency and Security services, which are squarely covered under the category of supplies attracting GST liabilities on reverse charge basis, in terms of the Notification. Further Section 9(3) of the CGST Act 2017 stipulates that all the provisions of the CGST Act 2017 shall apply to the recipient as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both, where the tax shall be paid on reverse charge basis by the recipient. Thus the recipient of service is liable to pay GST in respect of the services notified under Section 9(3) of the Act, ibid read with Notification 13/2017-Central Tax(Rate). It is pertinent to mention that GST is levied on the supply of service and liability is fastened independently for each of the supplies. Levy of tax or otherwise on a particular supply does not have a bearing on the taxability of other supplies received or provided by a taxpayer. Thus the exemption provided to the outward supplies of the applicant does not have a bearing on the GST liabilities under reverse charge basis on the supplies received by the applicant. Issues:Determining liability to pay GST under Reverse Charge Mechanism for services procured by a manufacturer and supplier of exempted goods.Analysis:1. Admissibility of the Application:The issue pertains to the determination of tax liability on goods or services, making it admissible under Section 97(2)(e) of the CGST Act 2017.2. Brief Facts of the Case:The applicant, a manufacturer and supplier of exempted animal feeds, utilizes services of Goods Transport Agencies (GTA) and Security Services falling under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM). The applicant sought a ruling on whether they are liable to pay GST under RCM for these services.3. Applicant's Interpretation of Law:The applicant argues that since they deal with exempted goods, the RCM Notification No. 13/2017 dated 28.06.2017 should not apply to them.4. Findings and Discussion:The judges noted that the CGST Act and KGST Act are similar unless specifically mentioned. They considered the applicant's submissions, the issues involved, and relevant provisions during the hearing.5. Levy and Collection Analysis:Reference was made to Section 9(1) and 9(3) of the CGST Act regarding the levy and payment of GST under reverse charge basis. The judges highlighted the relevant provisions and notifications specifying services under RCM.6. Table Analysis:The table appended in the judgment lists categories of services under RCM, including services by GTA and Security Services. The applicant, being a registered person, falls under the recipient category for these services.7. Liability Determination:The judges emphasized that the recipient of services covered under RCM is liable to pay GST, regardless of the exemption status of their outward supplies. Each supply's taxability is independent, and exemption for outward supplies does not affect RCM liabilities for received services.8. Ruling:The final ruling stated that the applicant is indeed liable to pay GST under RCM for the services covered under RCM, despite being a manufacturer and supplier of exempted goods.This comprehensive analysis of the judgment provides a detailed understanding of the legal reasoning and conclusions reached by the Authority for Advance Rulings in Karnataka.