M/s Monalisa Co-Operative Housing Society Limited

1.At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST 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 provisions under the MGST Act.

2.The present appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as CGST Act” and “MGST Act”] by M/s. Monalisa Co-operative Housing Society Ltd, situated at 33 Monalisa, 3 Bomanji Petit Road, Near Parsee General Hospital, Maharashtra, Mumbai 400026. (“hereinafter referred to as “Appellant”) against the Advance Ruling No. GST- ARA-30/2020-21/B-71 dated 31.05.2022. pronounced by the Maharashtra Authority for vance Ruling (hereinafter referred to as “MAAR”).

3.1.M/s Monalisa Co-operative Housing Society Ltd (the ‘Appellant’) is a co-operative housing8 society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Housing Society Act (MCHS Act) having 48 Flats which provides services to its members and charges GST on maintenance charges recovered from its Members.

3.2.Appellant has submitted that when there is a transfer of a flat, the outgoing member makes a gratuitous & voluntary payment to the society. The same does not have any implications on outgoing formalities to be completed as per MCHS Act. The Appellant stated that the above contribution made is entirely voluntary and is not at all a consideration received in lieu of services provided by the Appellant.

3.3.The Appellant is also collecting funds from its members for future major repairs and renovation of the premises. Such funds have no immediate utilization purpose. The amount will only be utilized once the Appellant finalizes on the bids received for the repairs to be carried out.

4.Therefore, being aggrieved of the Impugned Order passed by MAAR, the present appeal is being filed before MAAAR, on basis of following the grounds.

5.The Appellant, in their Appeal memorandum, have, inter-alia, mentioned the following grounds:

i.The Contention of the ARA that Contributions from Outgoing Members are for Services received during their stay as members is incorreet.

ii. The ARA errs in stating that the contribution received from Members are for services received during their stay.

iii. We had already shared a copy of the maintenance bill with the ARA that supply provided

iv. explains that the supply provided by the society to the member is in the form of maintenance services for which regular quarterly billings are done by the Society to its members. We state that any amount to be collected from the members above and over the maintenance has to be done by means of a resolution passed at the members meetings.

2.Statement _that Voluntary Contributions are not Voluntary but for Building Betterment and Repairs is Incorrect The Learned ARA Authority errs in stating that Voluntary Contribution is not Voluntary

i. but a compulsory payment against Building Betterment and Repairs is incorrect. We have submitted an Affidavit which the ARA states in its order as “Half Baked” which

ii. specifically mentions that the Voluntary Contribution is paid by the member on his own free will and only for the welfare of the society and that the society is free to use the fund in any manner as they require.

iii. The ARA has conveniently ignored the entire affidavit and only focus on point I which states that the amount is being given as Voluntary Contribution for Building Betterment fund. The ARA has also exceeded its jurisdiction on stating that the Affidavit submitted is an incomplete one. The Affidavit has been duly signed and notarized as required under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The original affidavit can be produced at the time of the hearing.

3.The Statement that Voluntary Contributions as a procedure is asked from all outgoing members is incorrect.

i. The ARA has not provided any reasonable explanation that the voluntary contributions provided by outgoing members is in fact not voluntary but in lieu of NOC provided as per By Laws.

ii. We have already given affidavits by the Treasurer of the Society which clearly states that no contribution is being taken in lieu of NOC. It is entirely out of its own free will that an outgoing member makes the said contribution.

6.The personal hearing in the matter was conducted on 28.02.2023 which was attended by Shri. Akshay Shah, CA & Shri. Adit Shah, Consultant on behalf of the Appellant, wherein the Appellant reiterated their earlier submissions nmade while filing the Appeal under consideration.

7. We have carefully gone through the entire appeal memorandum containing the submissions made by the Appellant vis-a-vis the Advance Ruling passed by the MAAR, wherein the MAAR has held that payment received by the appellant from the outgoing member in the name of gratuitous payment/voluntary contribution is a consideration for the supply of services by the appellant and hence taxable under GST law.

Download PDF:
M/s Monalisa Co-Operative Housing Society Limited

For Reference Visit:
Maharashtra AAAR

Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law