Case Details: Data Processing forms Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 28 Centax 86 (App. A.A.R.-GST-Guj.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- B.V. Siva Naga Kumari & Rajeev Topno, Members
- S/Shri Bhupesh Maretha, Jeevan Vasave, Advs. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The appellant provided services to the Gujarat Panchayat Service Selection Board (GPSSB), including composing, typesetting, printing, packing, transporting sealed question papers, as well as ICR/OMR/OCR scanning. Seeking GST exemption under Sl. No. 3A of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-06-2017, the appellant contended that GPSSB qualifies as a ‘local authority’ under Section 2(69) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling (GAAR) held that GPSSB does not meet the statutory definition of a local authority, nor is it a Central or State Government entity, making the services ineligible for exemption. Aggrieved, the appellant appealed before the Gujarat Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR).
AAAR Held
The Hon’ble AAAR upheld GAAR’s ruling, affirming that GPSSB does not qualify as a local authority under Section 2(69) of the CGST Act, 2017. The AAAR found that GPSSB does not meet any statutory criteria required for exemption under Sl. Nos. 3 and 3A of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), as the services, including ICR, OMR, and OCR scanning, were not provided to a government or local authority. Concluding that the appellant was unable to establish grounds for exemption, the AAAR rejected the appeal, confirming that GST is applicable on the services rendered to GPSSB.
List of Cases Cited
- Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. Dilip Kumar & Company — 2018 (361) E.L.T. 577 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 12]
- R C — Jain AIR 1981 SC 951 affirmed — Referred [Para 24]
List of Notifications Cited
- Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax(Rate), dated 28-6-2017.
