Advance ruling cannot be given in respect of past and completed supply: AAR

The Authority of Advance Rulings in matter of M/s. United Breweries Limited has said that Advance ruling cannot be given in respect of past and completed supply.

The Question was that “Whether assignment/transfer of leasehold rights in land & structures standing there by the applicant to M/s. Greenscape IT Park LLP would qualify as ‘supply’ and liable to GST and if so, then under which section of GST Act? ”

To this the Authority held, “Based on the submissions made by the applicant and hearings conducted, the subject application is rejected as being non-maintainable as per Section 95 of the CGST Act, 2017 because the questions raised by the applicant are in respect of past and completed supply as on the date of the application and not supply, which is being undertaken/proposed to be undertaken.”

As per Section 95 a there are two conditions to be fulfilled for making an advance ruling application: firstly, the question asked should be in relation to supply undertaken by the applicant and secondly the question should be in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant.

Authority found that in the subject case, the first condition mentioned above is satisfied in as much as it is the applicant who has provided the impugned services.

Further, with respect to the second condition for the supply ‘to be undertaken or proposed to be undertaken’ we observe that the applicant has executed the subject agreement on 24.12.2020 known as “Deed of Assignment Cum Transfer” by virtue of which applicant have agreed to transfer its rights over the land & structures standing thereon to M/s. Greenscape IT Park LLP (‘Greenscape’ for short) for an un-expired lease period viz. more than 30 years for an agreed consideration of Rs. 72, 90, 00,000/-which has also been received by the applicant prior to the date of filing of the subject agreement i.e. 22.02.2021.

Hence, on the date on the filing of the subject application the subject supply was already completed (in all respects) and was neither being undertaken, nor was proposed to be undertaken.

In view of the above facts we find that the applicant/application does not satisfy the conditions of Section 95 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the application is, therefore, rejected as being not maintainable.

Click here to Download the Order