Only Suppliers of Goods/Services are Eligible to Seek Advance Rulings, Not Recipient: UP AAR Rules
The present application, dated August 28, 2024, has been filed in Form GST ARA-01 by a company named M/S National Capital Region Transport Corporation Limited before the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR), Goods and Services Tax (GST), Uttar Pradesh, 4, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
The applicant is a registered company under the GST Act, having GSTIN 09AAECN4492L1ZW, and is located at Khasra No. 112, Main Meerut Road, Garhi Guldhar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, 201003.
The applicant came into effect on August 21, 2013, as a company under the Companies Act 1956. Presently, the company is involved in some projects, including the Delhi-Ghaziabad-Meerut Regional Rapid Transit System (‘RRTS’) corridor, the Sarai Kale Khan (Delhi)-Gurugram-Shahjahanpur-Neemrana-Behror-Alwar Corridor and the Delhi-Panipat RRTS corridor.
The company is a joint venture of the Government of India and the States of Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh, with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs as the nodal Ministry.
Question Asked by Applicant:
Seeking the Uttar Pradesh Authority for Advance Ruling (No. UP ADRG 08/2025), dated January 02, 2025, the applicant has asked the following question:
“Question 1: Whether the work undertaken by the Applicant under the Self-Execution Scheme through third-party contractors to shift/re-route the transmission lines of Pashchimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as “PVVNL”) can be treated as a “supply” of service in terms of Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 between the Applicant & PVVNL?
Question 2: Whether there is any Assets Transfer from the Applicant to PVVNL and vice versa?
Question 3: Whether at first paying the GST amount on the entire value of the work done to the third-party contractors (including the cost shifting/modification of the transmission line) and then again paying the GST amount (in the name of asset transfer Charges) on the entire value of the work plus supervision charges to PVVNL would result in double taxation? This is because GST is a tax on the supply of goods and services, and the same transaction should not be taxed twice. If both the contractor and PVVNL are charging GST on the same work or service, it implies that the Applicant is paying GST twice for the same transaction, which is not the intended purpose of the tax system.”
Answer Given by Uttar Pradesh AAR:
The following answer has been given by the Uttar Pradesh Authority for Advance Ruling Goods and Services Tax (GST) to the question asked by the applicant:
When the authority examined the case carefully, it was discovered that M/s National Capital Region Transport Corporation Limited (NCRTC) sought an Advance Ruling. However, in this matter, NCRTC is not the supplier but rather the receiver of the goods/services. The issue relates to the shifting or rerouting of transmission lines during the construction of the Delhi–Ghaziabad–Meerut RRTS corridor.
These transmission lines belong to PVVNL, and the shifting work is carried out under PVVNL’s supervision. Therefore, the goods/services are provided by PVVNL to NCRTC. As per Section 95(a) of the CGST Act, 2017, only the supplier of goods or services can apply for an Advance Ruling. Hence, NCRTC is not eligible to file this application since it is the recipient, not the supplier.
Considering this fact, the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR), Goods and Services Tax (GST), Uttar Pradesh ruled that no ruling can be given in this matter.
Citation: M/S National Capital Region Transport Corporation Limited (AAR Uttar Pradesh); Advance Ruling No. UP ADRG 08/2025; 02/01/2025
Refer to the official advance ruling for complete information.
