Page 114 - GSTL_26th March 2020_Vol 34_Part 4

624 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 34
(d) admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been
paid;
(e) determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or
both;
(f) whether applicant is required to be registered;
(g) whether any particular thing done by the applicant with respect to
any goods or services or both amounts to or results in a supply of
goods or services or both, within the meaning of that term.
The Act limits the Advance Ruling Authority to decide the issues earmarked for
it under Section 97(2) and no other issue can be decided by the Advance Ruling
Authority. Of the above questions on which ruling is sought by the applicant, the
question at (2) relates to eligibility to credit of tax paid by them at their buyers’
end. The eligibility to credit of input tax paid by the applicant alone is covered
under clause (d) of Section 97(2) above and the eligibility at the buyers’ hand
when raised by an applicant do not fall under any of the category specified un-
der Section 97(2) of the Act and therefore not within the ambit of this authority.
This position was explained during the personal hearing also. The First Question
relating to whether GST is applicable on a transaction is within the ambit of this
authority and is taken up for consideration.
6.1 In the case at hand, the applicant is undertaking two transactions -
T1 : Transfer of title in moulds from the foreign supplier to the Appli-
cant.
T2 : Transfer of title in moulds from the applicant to the Indian buyer.
The question raised by the applicant is with respect to transaction at T2 above. It
is stated that the moulds manufactured by the foreign supplier is not physically
imported and only the title in the moulds are transferred from the foreign sup-
plier to the applicant and thereupon by the applicant to the vendor located in
India. The applicant on his interpretation of law has stated that on application of
Section 10(1)(c) of IGST Act, 2017, the place of supply is Thailand and the suppli-
er is in India, therefore the supply could get covered under the ambit of Inter-
State Supply in terms of IGST Act, but IGST levy can be imposed only to supplies
within the territorial jurisdiction of the IGST Act. The applicant has stated that
the supply in the case at hand takes place outside the territorial jurisdiction of
IGST Act and thereby not subject to IGST and has sought to clarify the applicabil-
ity of GST in the said transaction.
6.2 From the Amendment for Vendor Tooling PO for
NMIPL/2012/K2/IEVT/92, dated 18th December, 2014 furnished by the appli-
cant, it is seen that Order is placed with the conditions that the Tools mentioned
under the PO are 100% property of Nissan Motors India Pvt. Ltd.; Ordered Tools
must be maintained under good condition during production; supplier has to
submit the Tool Ownership certificate with clear Tool location; Supplier has to
submit the digital Photograph of the actual Tool alongwith the tool Ownership
Letter; etc. From the ‘Declaration’ dated 16-3-2019, related to transfer of Tool
Ownership by the applicant to their vendor, it is seen that the declaration is
against Invoice No. 201364, dated 16-3-2019 raised on the vendor. Also, it is seen
from the ‘Tool Ownership Certificate’ dated 16-3-2009, with reference to the PO
NMIPL/2012/K2/LEVT/92-001, dated 18th December, 2014, the certificate lists
the part number, description of Tools, Location of Tools, etc. Further, in the dec-

GST LAW TIMES  26th March 2020  210