Page 175 - GSTL_16th July 2020_Vol. 38_Part 3

2020 ] IN RE : KSC BUILDCON PVT. LTD. 413
2020 (38) G.S.T.L. 413 (A.A.R. - GST - Raj.)

BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING UNDER GST,
RAJASTHAN
S/Shri J.P. Meena, Member (Central Tax) and Hemant Jain,
Member (State Tax)
IN RE : KSC BUILDCON PVT. LTD.
Advance Ruling No. RAJ/AAR/2020-21/03, dated 14-5-2020
Mining - Support service to mining - Applicant tasked to extract 2 lakh
MT of Serpentine/Green Marble from mine site - Applicant required under
agreement to deploy some earthmoving vehicles and manpower at mining site
- Non-achievement of per day target making applicant liable for penalty - Ap-
plicant entitled to sole consideration of ` 400 per ton extracted - Applicant not
owning mining lease and having no ownership over minerals extracted - Sole
focus of agreement being achievement of extraction of mineral targets and not
construction of infrastructure at site - Infrastructure developed by applicant as
per its requirement and not as condition under agreement - Supply of man-
power and vehicles by applicant was for its own benefit - These supplies can-
not be categorized as independent supplies made to leaseholder - That appli-
cant purchase/lease land in nearby in case target fixed by not achieved not rel-
evant - Applicant providing support to leaseholder - Activity amounted to ser-
vice even though minerals extracted were goods - Activity not works contract
as no creation of immovable property and then transfer of property in goods -
Ownership of property and minerals was with leaseholder - Applicant provid-
ing support services to mining - Activity covered under SAC 998622 and at-
tracted GST @ 18% (CGST 9% + SGST 9%) in terms of Notification No.
11/2017-C.T. (Rate) (as amended). [2019 (20) G.S.T.L. 605 (A.A.R. - GST) distin-
guished]. [paras E, F]
Advance Ruling - Scope of - Questions regarding difference between
operator and manpower and whether the Special Purpose Vehicles classifiable
as “Machinery” - Beyond scope of Advance Ruling - Section 97(2) of Central
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. [paras E, F]
Ruling in favour of department
CASE CITED
P.K. Agrawala — 2019 (20) G.S.T.L. 605 (A.A.R. - GST)
— Distinguished ...................................................................................................................... [Paras C, E]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Ankit Sapra, Authorized Representative, for the
Assessee.
[Order]. - At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provi-
sions of both the CGST Act and the RGST Act are the same except for certain
provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar
provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same
provision under the RGST Act. Further to the earlier, henceforth for the purposes
of this Advance Ruling, a reference to such a similar provision under the CGST
Act/RGST Act would be mentioned as being under the “GST Act”.
The issue raised by M/s. KSC Buildcon Private Limited, 114-Piith
Simalwara, Khirkaiyan, Dungarpur - 314001 (hereinafter the applicant) is fit to
GST LAW TIMES  16th July 2020  175