Page 120 - GSTL_23rd April 2020_Vol 35_Part 4

446 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 35
20. As regards the Lift, Escalator, Travellator, Water treatment Plant,
Sewage Treatment Plant, HSD yard, Mechanical Car Park, DG Set and, Trans-
formers no information is furnished as to who is doing the installation of the said
items. Therefore, we will examine the issue based on the available documents. It
is seen from the copies of invoices furnished by the appellant that, in the case of
Lifts, escalators and travellator, the vendor M/s. OTIS Elevator Company has
entered into a contract with the appellant for the supply and installation of pas-
senger lifts, service lifts, escalator and travellator at the project site. No doubt
lifts, escalator and travellators are fixed to the earth with structural supports and
they qualify as plant and machinery. However, it appears that the supply of the
lifts and its installation at the project site of the appellant are done by the vendor
M/s. OTIS. In such a case, M/s. OTIS will not be hit by the restriction imposed
under Section 17(5)(d) since they are engaged in the construction of lift, escalator,
travellator which qualifies as plant and machinery. However, the appellant will
not be eligible for the credit of the tax paid on such procurements since the ap-
pellant is not doing the installation of the lifts, escalators and travellators.
21. Similarly, in the case of the invoice issued by Wohr Parking Systems
Pvt. Ltd., it is seen that the vendor has raised an invoice on the appellant for the
supply of 1 car parking system Combilift 551 for a value of Rs. 2.69 cr. It is also
stated in the said invoice that the supporting steel structure is in Wohr’s scope.
This evidences the fact that the complete supply and installation of the car park-
ing system is done by the vendor. The car parking system being fixed to the earth
with structural support qualifies as “Plant and machinery”. However, the appel-
lant will be hit by the restriction imposed in Section 17(5)(d) and will not be eli-
gible for the credit of the tax paid on such procurements inasmuch as the appel-
lant is not doing the construction and installation of the car parking system.
22. Further, in the case of the Invoice No. 20, dated 5-11-2018 raised by
M/s. Veeresh Engineering Works, it is for the fabrication, supply and installation
of the HSD yard. The work involves supply of single shell 25KL capacity MS
tank for storing HSD, fabrication, testing and commissioning of single shell 25KL
capacity MS tank and obtaining NOC from the Dy. Commissioner after getting
clearances from the local authorities. This evidences that the complete setting up
of the HSD yard is done by the vendor M/s. Veeresh Engineering Works and not
by the appellant. Here again the appellant will not be eligible for the credit of the
input tax paid on such supply as the construction of the HSD yard has not been
done by him.
23. In respect of the Water treatment Plant and Sewage Treatment
Plant, as can be seen from the photographs, they form part of the civil structure
of the immovable property. Civil structures are specifically excluded from the
definition of “Plant and machinery”. So also, the DG Set and Transformer - they
are procured as independent items and their installation becomes part of the civil
structure of the immovable property. Therefore, we hold that the appellant is not
eligible of the credit of the taxes paid on the procurement of the Water Treatment
Plant, Sewage Treatment Plant, DG Set and Transformer. In view of the above,
we hold that the ruling given by the lower Authority is correct in law.
24. The applicant has placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the
Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in the case of “M/s. Safari Retreats Pvt. Ltd. and An-
other v. Chief Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax & Others” reported in
2019 (5) TMI 1278 - Orissa High Court = 2019 (25) G.S.T.L. 341 (Ori.). It is seen
that in the said case, the prayers are -
GST LAW TIMES  23rd April 2020  240