Page 196 - GSTL_6th August 2020_Vol 39_Part 1

122 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 39
4. Hearing
Preliminary hearing in the matter was held on 12-12-2019. Sh. Kavish
Shah, C.A., appeared on behalf of the applicant, and requested for admission of
their application. Jurisdictional Officer Smt. Flavy Cardozo, Superitendent, Div.-
II, Mumbai East also appeared.
The application was admitted and called for final hearing on 11-2-2020.
Sh. Kavish Shah, C.A., and Sh. Mayur Nisar, Authorized Representative, ap-
peared for the applicant and made both, oral and written submissions. Jurisdic-
tional Officer Smt. Flavy Cardozo, Superintendent, Div.-II, Mumbai East Ap-
peared and made written submissions. We heard both the sides.
5. Observations and findings :
5.1 We have gone through the facts of the case, documents on record
and submissions made by both, the applicant as well as the jurisdictional office.
5.2 We find that the applicant is proposing to give out entire Luxurious
Villas, consisting of multiple rooms, on rent to various customers in the State of
Maharashtra. The question is whether, as per Notification No. 11/2017-Central
Tax (Rate), dated 28 June, 2017, as amended, the entire Villa will be treated as
‘per unit’ or the individual rooms inside the Villas will be treated as ‘per unit’.
5.3 We find that the applicant will be charging rent for the entire Villa
and not as per room basis. Further, at any given point of time only one customer
will be entitled to take the Villa on lease.
5.4 We have no doubt, as per the submissions made by the applicant,
that they are treating the entire Villa as one unit and therefore will give the same
on rent to only one customer for any particular given date. In other words two
different clients will not be able to book the same Villa for the same period i.e. if
the particular Villa is booked by one client at a given date then another client will
not able to book the same Villa on the same day.
5.5 We observe that the applicant has no intention to rent out the rooms
inside the Villa, individually and therefore there is no question of the individual
rooms being treated as ‘per unit’ as per the above said Notification. The appli-
cant’s representative, during the course of the hearing also admitted that, since
they will be renting out the entire Villa, then each individual Villa may be treated
as ‘per unit’.
5.6 Applicant has cited the decision made by the Hon’ble Bombay High
Court in the case of The Travel & Tourism Association of GOA, Mandovi Hotels Pvt.
Ltd., Fomento Resorts And Hotels Ltd., Averina international Resorts Ltd. v. Union of
India, The Commissioner of Income Tax, Panaji GOA reported as [2019 (9) TMI 102],
We find that in the said case the dispute was under the Expenditure Tax Act,
1987 and in this case hotel rooms were given on rent and not the entire hotels as
such. We therefore find that the issue in this case and the subject matter before us
are not similar in any way and therefore the said decision of the Hon’ble High
Court is not applicable in the instant case.
5.7 The applicant has also cited the order of the Hon’ble Advance Rul-
ing Authority of Chhattisgarh pronounced in the case of Kamal Kishor Agarwal
Ramnath Bhimsen Charitable Trust reported as [2019 (4) TMI 1451 = 2019 (24)
G.S.T.L. 496 (A.A.R. - GST)], where the said trust was renting out individual beds
in their hostel room. In the subject case the applicant is renting out the entire Vil-
la and not individual rooms or beds and therefore his decision will also not be
applicable in the subject matter before us.
GST LAW TIMES  6th August 2020  196