Back
SUJOY PAUL, NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
Avantika Contractors (I) Limited – Appellant
Versus
Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (GST) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. existence of mou for construction (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claim of zero rate supplies under gst (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. legal arguments on applicability of gst (Para 7 , 13 , 14 , 25) |
| 4. indications of potential tax reimbursement (Para 8 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 21) |
| 5. provision of service and establishment definition are crucial for gst determination. (Para 10 , 24) |
| 6. establishment of principal legal relationships (Para 31 , 34 , 46) |
| 7. judicial interpretation of fixed establishment (Para 32 , 33 , 39 , 64) |
| 8. re-registration does not create separate entity (Para 42 , 43 , 45) |
| 9. reimbursement obligation due to ruling (Para 71 , 72 , 73) |
ORDER :
Sujoy Paul, J.
This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution impugns the Order-in-Appeal (OIA) No.AAAR/04/2022 dated 16.07.2022, whereby the view of the Advance Ruling Authority dated 05.08.2021 (Annexure P-18) was affirmed.
Petitioner’s case:-
2. The Government of India (GoI) entered into Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Government of Maldives for constructing a Police Academy funded by the GoI. In turn, the GoI appointed respondent No.2 i.e., National Buildings Construction Corporation Ltd., (NBCCL) to execute the constructi
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
