Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, West Bengal
Karam Chand Thapar & Bros (Coal Sales) Ltd., In re
For revenue
APPEAL CASE NO. 04/WBAAAR/APPEAL/2026-27
Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, West Bengal
APPEAL CASE NO. 04/WBAAAR/APPEAL/2026-27
Where appellant completed construction contracts and received final payments prior to GST regime, but later sought advance ruling regarding taxability of compensation received post-arbitration, since advance ruling provisions applies only to ongoing or proposed supplies, and not to completed transactions, application was not maintainable and ruling could not be sustained
Where WBAAR admitted and ruled on an application regarding classification and taxability, on appeal, AAAR could examine maintainability even though admission occurred under Section 98(2), as appellate jurisdiction under Section 101(1) allows consideration of legal questions including maintainability, despite no departmental appeal or specific challenge from appellant.
Where appellant completed works pre-GST, received arbitral award in 2023 with payments in 2024, invocation of Section 142(2)(a) for treating awarded sums as upward price revision was incorrect since arbitral award alone does not constitute upward revision, and whether components are consideration for supplies, revision, damages or other heads requires case-specific fact scrutiny outside advance ruling scope.
Where amounts awarded for services that were potentially taxable under erstwhile law but not actually taxed are considered in transitional provisions; mere non-payment of service tax under old regime does not by itself mandate levy of GST, as section 142(11)(a) intends to prevent double taxation based on leviability under earlier law, not actual payment
Section 97, read with section 95, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Section 101, read with section 97, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Section 142 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.
Members
The background, the issue before the court and the reasoning behind the decision are free for members — along with the professional discussion on this ruling.
Free to join. No card required.
Already a member? Sign in
Karnataka High Court
Third-party petitioner lacked locus to challenge an AAR/AAAR ruling under Article 226, as such rulings bind only applicant therein and its jurisdictional authority; absent contractual GST classification or rate terms in respect of contract entered between petitioner and said applicant, no civil consequence arose, and writ jurisdiction could not rewrite contract
GSTAT Agra
Where real estate developer refunded service tax received on advances for cancelled bookings after GST transition and treated refunded tax as ITC to adjust liability, service tax paid before appointed date was not input tax under GST, ITC was not admissible, and refund could only be claimed under transitional provisions of existing law, not by unilateral credit in electronic ledger
Calcutta High Court
Where electrical line repair and maintenance services had been completed in 2015 before introduction of GST, subsequent approval and billing in 2019 could not alter date of supply or bring completed services within GST regime, consequently payment withheld for want of GST registration was directed to be released with interest after deducting tax, if any, applicable under pre-GST regime