<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (8) TMI 575 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410997</link>
    <description>Compulsory contributions to the National Mineral Exploration Trust and the District Mineral Foundation, when imposed under the mining regulatory framework, were treated as part of the composite consideration for the Government&#039;s supply of mining rights and permission to extract mineral ore. Because the payments arose from the statutory regime and were linked to grant and enjoyment of the mining licence, they were included in the value of supply under section 15(2) as charges levied under other laws. The ruling held that GST was payable under reverse charge in the hands of the mining lease holder where the service provider was the Government and the recipient was a business entity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2021 09:28:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=652741" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 575 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410997</link>
      <description>Compulsory contributions to the National Mineral Exploration Trust and the District Mineral Foundation, when imposed under the mining regulatory framework, were treated as part of the composite consideration for the Government&#039;s supply of mining rights and permission to extract mineral ore. Because the payments arose from the statutory regime and were linked to grant and enjoyment of the mining licence, they were included in the value of supply under section 15(2) as charges levied under other laws. The ruling held that GST was payable under reverse charge in the hands of the mining lease holder where the service provider was the Government and the recipient was a business entity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>