Court :
AAR, Delhi
Brief :
The AAAR, Delhi, in the matter of M/s Indian Institute of Corporate Affairs [Advance Ruling (Appeal) Order No. 01/DAAAR/2022-23 dated May 05, 2022] has held that the delay in filing an appeal beyond the prescribed limit can't be condoned.
Citation :
Advance Ruling (Appeal) Order No. 01/DAAAR/2022-23 dated May 05, 2022
The AAAR, Delhi, in the matter of M/s Indian Institute of Corporate Affairs [Advance Ruling (Appeal) Order No. 01/DAAAR/2022-23 dated May 05, 2022] has held that the delay in filing an appeal beyond the prescribed limit can't be condoned.
Facts:
M/s Indian Institute of Corporate Affairs, ("the Appellant") is a society registered under Section 12A/12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the IT Act") and had an exemption under Section 10(23C) (iv) and (v) of the IT Act.
The Appellant has entered into Memorandum of Understanding ("MoU") with the Agriculture Insurance Company of India Limited ("AICL"), wherein, AICL in order to discharge its Corporate Social Responsibility ("CSR") for the financial year 2016-17, awarded a social welfare assignment on "Implementation of Integrated Village development program - improving infrastructure facilities in 50 villages in the states of Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh".
This appeal has been filed by the Appellant challenging the ruling passed by the AAR, Delhi vide Advance Ruling No. 08/DAAR/2018dated June 28, 2020 holding that the amount received by the Appellant from the AICL is not in the nature of grant in aid and is covered in the definition of "consideration" for the supply of goods or services under Section 2(31) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("the CGST Act"). Further, the said supply of goods or services are not exempted from the payment of Goods or Services Tax ("GST") as per Notification No. 12/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) dated June 28, 2017 ("the Service Exemption Notification"). Hence the Appellant is liable to pay the GST under the agreement with the AICL.
Argument by the Appellant:
The Appellant contended that, the amount received as a grant, for executing specific charitable activities and the entire amount received was subject to actual utilization. Further, the Appellant had no right or possibility to generate any surplus out of the contract. The unspent balance (if any) is subject to a refund or directions of the donor and there was no reward or benefit offered other than the actual expenditures towards charitable purposes.
Issue:
Held:
The AAAR, Delhi, in Advance Ruling (Appeal) Order No. 01/DAAAR/2022-23 dated May 05, 2022, held as under: