Page 123 - GSTL_26th March 2020_Vol 34_Part 4

2020 ] IN RE : M.V. INFRA SERVICES PVT. LTD. 633
provided by the applicant under sub-contract, also should be ex-
empted, under Entry 72 of the Notification supra.
(e) The applicant intend to rely on the Advance Ruling given by this
authority in the case of M/s. Quatro Rail Tech Solutions Ltd. [2019 (31)
G.S.T.L. 620 (A.A.R. - GST)], and also the ruling in the case of M/s.
NHPC Ltd. [2019 (23) G.S.T.L. 249 (A.A.R. - GST)], issued by the Ad-
vance Ruling Authority, State of Uttarakhand.
(f) The incidence of GST, being the indirect tax, is upon the recipient of
supply; any increase in the cost, in the form of GST, will accrue to
the Government, being the recipient; the exemption on the training
services is with an intention to lesser the burden on the Government
treasury; taxing the said services only because they are rendered
through main contractor results in defeating the legislative intent
and results in increased burden to the treasury of the Government
of Maharashtra and hence legislative intent may please be given
more weightage than the technicalities.
5. Findings & discussion :
5.1 We have considered the submissions made by the Applicant in their
application for advance ruling as well as the submissions made by Sri Dayanan-
da K., Chartered Accountant and duly authorised representative of the applicant
during the personal hearing. We have also considered the issues involved, on
which advance ruling is sought by the applicant, and relevant facts.
5.2 At the outset, we would like to state that the provisions of both the
CGST Act and the KGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. There-
fore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a refer-
ence to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under
the KGST Act.
5.3 The applicant sought advance ruling in respect of the question men-
tioned at Para 3 supra, as they are likely to get sub-contract work, for imparting
training of skill development to Building & other Construction workers, from
M/s. Aditya Call Centre Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru (“Main Contractor”), who is ex-
pecting to get the assignment. In this regard, they sought rate of tax on the ser-
vices to be provided and the applicability of Entry No. 69 or 72 of the Notifica-
tion No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017.
5.4 The applicant contends that the total expenditure of the said train-
ing programme is to be borne by the Government of Maharashtra under its flag-
ship Skill Development Mission; they, though under sub-contract, will be provid-
ing services to Maharashtra State Skill Development Society, Skill Development
& Entrepreneurship Department, Government of Maharashtra in a “bill to-ship
to” model; the services of main contractor are exempted under Entry No. 72 of
the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017 and the appli-
cant, through the main contractor, will be providing the same services to the
Government of Maharashtra and hence the said services, to be provided by the
applicant under sub-contract, also should be exempted.
5.5 We proceed to examine the entitlement of exemption to the main
contractor under Entry Numbers 69 & 72, of Notification No. 12/2017-Central
Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017, respectively one at a time. Entry No. 69 exempts the
services, covered under Service Code 9991 or 9992 or 9983, provided by (a) the
National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) set up by Government of India,
GST LAW TIMES  26th March 2020  219