Fixed Establishment test requires registration where a construction site shows permanence; inter-establishment movement without consideration is supply.

Applying the statutory fixed establishment test under the CGST framework, the authority found that extended assembly activity at a construction site with dedicated personnel and equipment meets the permanence and resource threshold, requiring registration in the state where the site is located. It held that where a site within the same state exhibits those characteristics it must be added as an additional place of business, while sites in other states require separate registration. Finally, applying the statutory treatment of inter-establishment movements and Schedule I, the movement of materials to another establishment without consideration qualifies as a supply.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the applicant is required to obtain registration in the state where a construction site is located when precast structures are manufactured at the applicant's principal place of business and the applicant claims no fixed establishment at the site; (ii) Whether it is mandatory to register a site address as an additional place of business when the site is within the same state but different from the registered office and only a temporary office exists; (iii) Whether transportation of materials for erection of precast structures to construction sites in other states amounts to supply where there is no consideration and no two different parties are involved.

Issue (i): Whether the applicant must obtain registration in the state where the construction site is located when it assembles precast structures there but claims no fixed establishment.

Analysis: The headnote applies the definition of "fixed establishment" under Section 2(50) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which requires a sufficient degree of permanence and suitable human and technical resources. The Authority examined the factual matrix-presence of personnel and equipment at the site for assembling precast structures over an extended period-and found the degree of permanence and use of resources met the statutory threshold for a fixed establishment.

Conclusion: The applicant is required to obtain registration in the state where the construction site (fixed establishment) is located. This conclusion is against the applicant.

Issue (ii): Whether a site address within the same state but different from the registered office must be added as an additional place of business when only a temporary office exists.

Analysis: Applying the same fixed establishment test under Section 2(50) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the Authority held that where assembling at a site within the applicant's principal state involves sufficient permanence and resources, such sites may be added as additional places of business. If the site is in another state, separate registration in that state is required.

Conclusion: Where the construction site within the same state has the characteristics of an additional place of business, the applicant should add it as an additional place of business; if the site is in another state, registration in that state is required. The conclusion imposes registration obligations and is against the applicant to that extent.

Issue (iii): Whether transportation of materials for erection of precast structures to construction sites in other states amounts to supply even in the absence of consideration and absence of two different parties.

Analysis: The Authority applied Section 7 and Schedule I of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and considered Sections 25(4) and 25(5) treating establishments with separate registrations as distinct persons. Activities specified in Schedule I made without consideration fall within the scope of "supply" under Section 7. Given that the applicant is treated as having distinct establishments, movement of materials without consideration to another establishment falls within Schedule I and thus constitutes a supply.

Conclusion: The transportation of material used in erection of precast structures to construction sites in other states amounts to supply. This conclusion is against the applicant.

Final Conclusion: The Authority concludes that (i) presence of sufficient permanence and resources at a construction site constitutes a fixed establishment requiring registration in the state of the site, (ii) sites within the same state that meet the criteria should be added as additional places of business while sites in other states require separate registration, and (iii) transportation of materials to such sites without consideration qualifies as "supply" under Section 7 read with Schedule I and Sections 25(4) and 25(5). Questions (d)-(k) regarding procedural invoicing, delivery challans, e-way bills and related documentation were held not to fall within Section 97(2) and were rejected under Section 98(2) of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: A place qualifies as a "fixed establishment" if it exhibits sufficient degree of permanence and suitable human and technical resources (Section 2(50)), and activities specified in Schedule I made without consideration constitute "supply" under Section 7; distinct establishments are treated as distinct persons under Section 25, bringing such inter-establishment movements within the scope of supply.

---