Held - The records shows that the compactor machine was transported from head office at Rajasthan to work place at Uttar Pradesh for completion of work. The delivery challan and e-way bill were not produced at the time of interception but along with the notice, the same were produced in which no other discrepancy was pointed out. The delivery challan itself shows that goods were transferred from.....

Held - In the subject case the site offices/group companies cannot be treated as persons who are employed by the applicant. The site offices are independent offices separately registered under the GST Laws. Similarly the group companies are also separately registered under the GST Laws and since both the site offices as well as the group companies cannot be treated as employees, the applicant cannot get the benefit of Entry No. 1 to Schedule I.....

Held-There is no dispute that each unit registered in different States is a distinct person as per 25(4) of the CGST Act. When two units of the same business entity in different States take separate GST registration, then each registered unit will be considered as a distinct entity/ person as per the GST law. 

The employee-employer relationship is to be viewed separately for every registered unit of the business entity. Therefore, i.....

Held - The services provided to the employer, i.e. the corporate office by the persons employed by the corporate office are in the nature of the employee-employer relationship. Further, since the corporate office and the units are distinct persons under the Act, there is no such relationship between the employees of one distinct entity with another distinct entity, at least as per the Goods and Service Tax Acts, even if they are belonging to t.....