2020 (11) TMI 1069

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lidays. Village- Shivlalpur Pandey. Kashipur Road, Ramnagar (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') under Section 100 of the CGST Act 2017 against the Advance Ruling No.03 2020-21 dated 08.07.2020 passed by the Authority on Advance Ruling, Uttarakhand. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the SGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under the SGST Act. The facts in brief, are as follows- 1. M s Vardhman Holidays. Village- Shivlalpur Pandey. Kashipur Road, Ramnagar had, vide application dated 07.02.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vides various services to its customers classifying the same as supply of service. more specifically tabulated as under:- SI. No Description of Activity Nature of service SAC code GST rate 1. Accommodation services in Hotel Supply of service 9963 12%/18% with ITC 2. Renting of immovable service ( Banquet hall renting) Supply of service 9972 18% with ITC 3. Restaurant Services Supply of service 9963 5% without ITC 3. Hearing in the matter was fixed on 25.02.2020, wherein DC, SGST, Uttarakhand submitted that a writ petition (WP No. 1898 2019) is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand on a similar issue in the ease of M/s Rosewood Hospitality (P) Ltd.. Thus, the Autho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty (P) Ltd. Further, the Authority for Advance Ruling also observed that though the admissibility of ITC on goods services received for construction of immovable property was decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Odisha in case of M/s Safari Retreats (P) Ltd, revenue's appeal in the matter is pending in SLP (C) (Diary No. 37367/2019) before Hon'ble Supreme Court. 6. Accordingly. AAR rejected the application filed by applicant in terms of the provisions of Section 98(2) of the Act on the grounds that issues raised by them were sub-judice. 7. Aggrieved with the aforesaid Order of the Authority for Advance for the state of Uttarakhand. M/s. Vardhman Holidays filed the appeal. The key grounds of appeal are as follows- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ecedents. d. That, rejection of Application on the basis of a sub-judice matter (pending in the case of M/s Rosewood) and considering the same as judicial discipline, is totally misplaced. e. The issues raised by them before the AAR have already been decided by Hon'ble High Court, Odisha in the case of M/s Safari Retreats (P) I.td and since no stay against the said order has been granted so the said order is binding on lower formations. Accordingly, the appellant has prayed to set-aside the impugned Ruling passed by the Authority of Advance Ruling on account of reasons and submissions made in the Appeal and decide the Application on merits. Personal Hearing The case was posted for personal hearing on 27.10.202....