TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 1166
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant) against the advance Ruling No. 08/DAAR/2018 dated 28.06.2019. The date of communication of Advance Ruling to the Appellant was 28.06.2019 Brief facts of the case: 3. The Indian Institute of Corporate Affairs (in short, `IICA'), the Appellant is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The Appellant has the following registrations and exemptions available:- (i) An exemption under Section 10(23C) (iv) and (v) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2017-18 onwards. (ii) Registration under Section 12A/12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide registration no. 12A/2009-10/I-1290/593 dated 19.08.2009. The Appellant is primarily engaged in:- (i) Induction and in-service training to Indian Corporate Law Service (ICLS) officers; (ii) Capacity building and training programs in the field of competition law, market regulations, finance, corporate governance and public policies; (iii) Policy advisory functions, public outreach and stakeholder consultations through seminars, conferences and forums. 3.1 The Appellant has the following network of schools and centres through which it executes the above stated func....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tructure facilities in 50 villages in the states of Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh as per the study done by the Appellant" 3.4 The sequence of facts and other relevant details are enumerated below:- (a) The IICA had entered into MoU with AICL on 03.08.2016 and conducted a comprehensive baseline and need assessment survey with regard to 50 villages in 5 states mentioned above and as a result, IICA submitted a detailed project report (DPR) to the AICL for the following broad activities to be executed towards discharge of its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for the financial year 2016-17 through IICA, as:- (i) Installation, transportation, maintenance and upkeep of Solar street lights. (ii) Installation, transportation, maintenance and upkeep of Solar Water pumps. (iii) Construction of household toilets as per government's Swachh Bharat Gramin design, with comprehensive awareness building and training of community for use and maintenance of toilets. (iv) Healthcare encompassing doctor's consultancy and basic medicine supplies for 1 year. (b) Consequently, AICL gave its consent for i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses of the service which are totally utilized in undertaking that job and no sum whatsoever has been paid to the Appellant towards reward. Further as stated in the MOU, any unspent amount shall be required to be refunded back to the donors. 4.1.1 In the case Apitco Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Hyderabad [2012] 26 taxmann.com 213 (SC) it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that if grants-in-aid received from Central and State Governments for implementation of welfare schemes for various sections of society are totally utilized for such purpose, there is no service provider-client relationship between assessee and Government. Only utilisation of money for agreed purposes will not result in service provider-client relationship; a client must not only pay the expenses of the service but also the consideration or reward for the service to the service provider. The Hon'ble Supreme Court affirmed the CESTAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of APITCO Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Hyderabad [2010] 29 STT 262 4.1.2 The Appellant has been doing trainings and implementing CSR projects as stated in the Statement of Facts, in the field of competition law, market regulat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w Delhi Bench in the case of Madhya Pradesh Consultancy Organisation Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal (2017) 83 taxmann.com 154 (New Delhi -CESTAT)/[2017] 62 GST 58 (New Delhi - CESTAT) held that where assessee, carried out various research, development project, training programmes acting as nodal agency on behalf of Ministries of Central Government and MP Government and received grants-in-aid in respect of these activities, consideration received was not liable to service tax under category of management consultancy services. The impugned contract of IICA fulfilled the following undisputed criteria: (i) The Appellant received a grant for executing specific charitable activities. (ii) The entire amount received was subject to actual utilization the Appellant had no right or possibility to generate any surplus out of the contract. (iii) The Appellant is a registered charity eligible to undertake grant based activity for charitable purposes. (iv) The unspent balance (if any) is subject to refund or directions of the donor. (v) There is no reward or benefit offered other than the actual expenditures towards charitable purp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....NPOs can be divided into three categories from GST perspective: (i) Activities pertaining to grant and donation which are completely without consideration and not in the course or furtherance of business are outside the scope of GST provided no benefit is given back to the donor. There is no client service provider relationship the implement or of the project is a trustee holding legal obligation. In such cases the amount granted should be subject to actual utilization and the unspent balance if any should belong to the donor. (ii) Activities having a component of supply which could be considered as "in the course or furtherance of business" are taxable under GST. However, some of such activity may be specifically exempt under GST. (iii) Activities having a component of supply but are not "in the course or furtherance of business" are not taxable under GST. In such cases the onus will be on the NPO to establish that the activity was not "in the course or furtherance of business". 4.2.3 The impugned contract fell in the first category as the Appellant is merely implementing the contract on behalf of the donor, the grant is subject to actual utilization ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....society at large. There is nothing in the transactions between the donor and the Appellant to suggest that it is a commercial transaction towards furtherance of business. The Supreme Court of India on several occasions has decided that any receipt for specific charitable purposes cannot be treated as a trade receipt. In the case CIT vs. Bzjli Cotton Mills (P.) Ltd. [1979] 116 ITR 60 Supreme Court debated the issue of certain charity/legal obligation being collected as a part of a commercial invoice. In this particular case the term `Dharmada' has been used which means `towards charity'. The court held that any money received from the customers towards charity was under a legal obligation to be spent for a specific purpose, therefore it could not be treated as a trading receipt. 4.3.1 Similar view were expressed by the Supreme Court in the case CIT vs. Tollygunge Club Ltd [1977] 107 ITR 776, here the Supreme Court considered the question substantially similar to the one referred above, in this case the assessee was a social and sports club one of whose activities consisted of conducting horse races with amateur riders. It charged for admission into the enclosure of the cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aws but it clearly provides that a legal obligation is an liability for specific purposes and cannot be treated as an income or gain of the recipient. 5. The Appellant therefore prayed (i) That Advance Ruling be set aside or dropped; (ii) that, the Appellant be granted personal hearing in this matter and to alter or amend the grounds; (iii) that, any other or further relief, as deemed fit, may also be granted to the Appellant. RECORD OF PERSONAL HEARING 6. The matter was posted for Personal Hearing when - and - appeared for Personal Hearing and reiterated the written submissions. During the personal hearing, it was pointed out by the Members that the appeal was filed beyond the period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the advance ruling. 6.1 On being pointed out that the Appeal was hit by limitation of time and hence not maintainable, the Ld. Advocate requested for submission of additional materials on the issue within a fortnight and the same was submitted on 20.4.2022 by email wherein it was primarily contended that the Appellant was under the impression that the Appellate Authority was not constituted and the Appellant had addressed a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed on 14.02.2020. 7.3.1 At this stage, it is extremely relevant to mention that the appeal was filed during the pre-covid period. Therefore, the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's Order dated 10.1.2022 in Suo Motu writ petition (c) no. 3 of 2020 as ordered in para 5(III) is not available. The relevant portion of the Order is reproduced as under: "5. Taking into consideration the arguments advanced by learned counsel and the impact of the surge of the virus on public health and adversities faced by litigants in the prevailing conditions, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the M.A. No. 21 of 2022 with the following directions: III. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply." 7.4 It has been, inter alia, the contention of the Appellant that the Appellant was prevented from filing an appeal as the Appel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re pari materia to the provisions of section 128 of the Customs Act and observed that the delay can be condoned in accordance with the language of the Statute which confers power on the Appellate Authority to entertain the appeal by condoning the delay only up to 30 days after expiry of 60 days, which is the normal period for preferring the appeal. It is for this reason that the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the Commissioner and the High Court were justified in holding that there was no power to condone the delay after the expiry of 30 days period and that the provisions of the Limitation Act would not be applicable. Para 8 of the judgment is reproduced below for the ease of understanding: "8. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) as also the Tribunal being creatures of Statute are vested with jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond the permissible period provided under the Statute. The period upto which the prayer for condonation can be accepted is statutorily provided. It was submitted that the logic of Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 (in short the 'Limitation Act') can be availed for condonation of delay. The first proviso to Secti....