It had argued that the GST rate for the first contract should be 5% and for the second, 18%. MAAR’s ruling, however, concluded that both contracts should invite GST at 18%.MAAR noted that a solar plant consisted of a host of equipment – solar panels and inverters merely being the most prominent – which were put together on the site by the contractor to form a solar power generating system (SPGS). “A solar power generating system is not available as a system as such,” its ruling said. The supplier is appointed not merely to supply the equipment, but there is design and engineering work even before the supply of equipment... The agreement does not stop at supply of equipment but extends to implementation, operation and maintenance as well.... On what basis can such a contract be termed a contract merely for ‘supply of goods’?”

Source: Economic Times May 09, 2018 10:30 UTC