https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411205 The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) determined that the construction service for the sports complex did not qualify for the concessional tax rate under Notification No. 11/2017-CT (Rate). The AAR confirmed it as a composite supply of works contract service, ruled that the Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (AUDA) is a "governmental authority," and concluded that the sports complex would be used for commercial purposes based on the nature of AUDA's existing sports facilities. Therefore, the concessional tax rate of 6% CGST + 6% SGST was deemed inapplicable to the project. en-us Fri, 09 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Mar 2025 16:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411205 The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) determined that the construction service for the sports complex did not qualify for the concessional tax rate under Notification No. 11/2017-CT (Rate). The AAR confirmed it as a composite supply of works contract service, ruled that the Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (AUDA) is a "governmental authority," and concluded that the sports complex would be used for commercial purposes based on the nature of AUDA's existing sports facilities. Therefore, the concessional tax rate of 6% CGST + 6% SGST was deemed inapplicable to the project. Case-Laws GST Fri, 09 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411205