Page 33 - GSTL_3rd September 2020_Vol 40_Part 1

2020 ] ADMISSIBILITY OF ITC — CONSTRUCTION OF WAREHOUSE FOR LETTING OUT J15
tation but in spite of clear cut law, the applicant has wrongly inter-
preted the Section to avail the benefit of inadmissible ITC.
(6) The submission of applicant that if ITC is not admissible, it would
render building now constructed for renting out uncompetitive is
also not correct as the said provision of Section 17(5)(d) of CGST
Act, is applicable to all not only to the applicant only. Further the
contention of the applicant that ITC is admissible as there is no
break of supply chain, we find that there is no provision in law that
the Section 17(5)(d) is not applicable and ITC is admissible where
there is no break of supply chain.
(7) In view of above, it is concluded that the ITC is not admissible on
the goods and services received and used in the construction of
warehouse used for letting out on rent as per the Section 17(5)(d) of
CGST Act, 2017.
Ruling
(1) We hold that no ITC of GST paid on goods purchased for the pur-
pose of construction and maintenance of warehouse such as Vitri-
fied Tiles, Marble, Granite, ACP sheet, Steel Plates, TMT Tor (saria),
Bricks, Cement, Paint and other construction material is admissible
under Section 17(5) of CGST Act, 2017.
(2) We hold that no ITC of GST paid on work contract service received
from registered and unregistered contractor for construction and
maintenance contract of building is admissible under Section 17(5)
of CGST Act, 2017.
(3) We hold that no ITC of GST paid on goods purchased and works
contract service received during the FY 2017-18 for the purpose of
construction and maintenance of warehouse is admissible under
Section 17(5) of CGST Act, 2017.
(4) The ruling is valid subject to the provisions under Section 103(2) un-
til and unless declared void under Section 104(1) of the GST Act.
Conclusion
Thus, as per the statutory provision Section 16 of CGST Act prescribes el-
igibility conditions of input tax credit would be available to a registered person
against GST paid on supply of goods and services. Section 17 of the CGST Act
prescribes the provision of apportionment and blocked credits to control avail-
ment of ineligible input tax credits. Both the provision under GST law has enact-
ed in the Parliament to bring stability and control misuses of provisions avoid
litigation between taxpayers and department. Therefore, the Authority for Ad-
vance Ruling has been established to bring an end to dispute and provide clarifi-
cation in case of ambiguity in the provisions being faced by the registered per-
son. But the Advance Ruling is only applicable to the said applicant only not has
the universal applicability. Hence, Advance Ruling is only one time solution to
the registered person who applied for the ruling. In this connection it can be re-
ferred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in the case of Safari
Retreats Private Limited reported in [2019 (25) G.S.T.L. 341 (Ori.)], wherein ob-
served that the petitioner is eligible to take input tax credit i.e. GST paid on pur-
chases of goods and services, which are used for construction of shopping mall
for the purpose of letting out of the same on rental basis and utilized input tax

GST LAW TIMES  3rd September 2020  49