<?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>2026 (6) TMI 835 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING,UTTARAKHAND</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793454</link>
    <description>An AAR held that an Uttarakhand smart-city special purpose vehicle qualifies as a Governmental Authority because it was established by Government with full public equity/control to perform municipal functions. It further held that services rendered in relation to the smart city and ESCO project, being linked to water supply and allied urban infrastructure functions in the Twelfth Schedule, are exempt under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate). However, the applicant was not treated as a pure agent for remitting the contractor&#039;s share, as it was actively involved in execution, supervision and financial management, so the remitted amounts remained part of the taxable value.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 08:32:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 835 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING,UTTARAKHAND</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793454</link>
      <description>An AAR held that an Uttarakhand smart-city special purpose vehicle qualifies as a Governmental Authority because it was established by Government with full public equity/control to perform municipal functions. It further held that services rendered in relation to the smart city and ESCO project, being linked to water supply and allied urban infrastructure functions in the Twelfth Schedule, are exempt under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate). However, the applicant was not treated as a pure agent for remitting the contractor&#039;s share, as it was actively involved in execution, supervision and financial management, so the remitted amounts remained part of the taxable value.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793454</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>