Case Title | Mr. Mamila Ashwini Reddy of ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. GP for Finance Planning TG |
Court | Telangana High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Surepalli Nanda |
Citation | 2022 (6) GSTPanacea 113 HC Telengana |
Judgement Date | 16-June-2022 |
Council for Petitioner | Mr. Tushar Jarwal |
Council for UOI | |
Council for State | K. Raji Reddy |
The Telangna High Court bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Surepalli Nanda has held that Place of supply of services in case of providing online platform where buyer and suppliers meets not to be regarded as passenger transportation service out-rightly.
FACTS OF THE CASE
In this case, the writ has been filed by appellant (Pvt. Ltd. Company) against the order passed by the respondent dtd 4th Feb 2022 for demanding the tax liability to be paid between period of April 2019 to Mar 2020.
The petitioner is having its registered office in Karnataka and other business places in various states. The petitioner runs business in the trade name OLA. Engaged in the online platform where supplier and buyer meet.
The transportation services provided by drivers outside state of telangna and same tax to be paid under IGST Act as per the provision of section 12 and section 11 of IGST Act and CGST Act 2017 respectively.
The respondent errasiounly t in this case submitted that in case of un registered recipient place of supply shall be location of such recipient only which completly contravention of the provisions of section 9, section 11 and section 12 of CGST and IGST Act respectively.
The appellate remanded the case as afresh by referring the provision of section 12 of IGSTAct that said in case of supply of services of passenger transportation in India, the place of supply shall be where the recipient embarks for the continues journey.
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, this court without going to the full flesh provision of section 12 of IGST Act 2017, directs the respondents order dated 4th feb 2022 set aside forthwith.
The court also held that the proceeding shall be started as afresh subject to the provision of the Act. The petitioner shall present before respondent within 3 weeks from this order. All the sequel and pending applications stands closed.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
In this case we have observed that any order which is in contravention of the provisions of this Act, shall be clearly proceeded and analysed by the authority. The writ is the last option where the parties in the views of outlook for provisions overwhelmation.
Download PDF:
Mr. Mamila Ashwini Reddy of ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
For Reference Visit:
Telengana High Court