Classification of service— In the instant case, the appellant has stated that they are engaged in construction activities including retro fitting, restoration etc. of civil structures predominantly for Government, Public Sector Undertakings and Government entities. 

The appeal is against the Advance Ruling Order. The appellant provides ‘works Contract’ services to TANGEDCO for carrying out retrofitting works and strengthening of the NPKRR Maaligai against seismic and wind effect and modification of elevation of NPKRR Maaligai. They had sought clarification on the applicability of the concessional rate of GST as per entry No. 3(vi) of Notification no. 11/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended for providing such services to TANGEDCO.

The lower authority has found that the supply cannot be considered as that meant predominantly for use other than commerce, industry, or any other business or professional purposes and the said works are not of ‘Generation and Distribution’ of Electricity which is the entrusted work for TANGEDCO and therefore, the concessional rate as per entry no. 3(vi) is not applicable to them and the services are chargeable to 18% GST.

In the case at hand, the works are undertaken by the appellant to the Headquarters of TANGEDCO Ltd, a commercial company in as much as TANGEDCO is involved in Generation and Distribution of Electricity against fixed Tariff. The words of the entry is clear and excludes the works supplied to Government entity, in respect of a Civil Structure or any other original works meant predominantly for commerce, industry or any other business or profession. Therefore, we don’t find any reason to disagree with the findings of the LA that the supply cannot be considered as that meant predominantly for use other than commerce, industry, or any other business or professional purposes.

Held that—  In the case at hand, the condition imposed for availing the concessional rate at the said entry is unambiguous in as much as it says that the services should have been procured by the Government entity, in relation to a work entrusted to it and the strengthening of the Headquarters building of TANGEDCO is definitely not an activity ‘in relation to’ Generation and Distribution of Electricity’, the work entrusted to it. Therefore, the contentions of the appellant in this regard are rejected.