Author: admin_gst

GST – Apportionment of credit and blocked credits. – Section 17 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Manner of distribution of credit by Input Service Distributor. – Section 20 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Eligibility and conditions for taking input tax credit. – Section 16 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Time of supply of goods. – Section 12 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Time of supply of services. – Section 13 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Composition levy. – Section 10 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Levy and collection. – Section 9 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Definitions. – Section 2 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Scope of supply. – Section 7 of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 as amended – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Notification exempting reverse charge under Section 9(4) rescinded in view of bringing into effect the amendments (regarding RCM on supplies by unregistered persons) in the GST Acts – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Jurisdiction of Joint Commissioner (Appeals) under GST defined. – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – GST rates for Composition Scheme with CGST Rules, 2017 aligned between notification and rules. – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – CGST (Amendment) Act, 2018 came into force w.e.f 1-2-2019 – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Input Tax Credit – A person, registered in WB, cannot claim ITC for CGST & SGST of other states – He cannot adjust the ITC of one state’s CGST for payment of another state’s CGST. – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Exemption from GST – classification of services – Security Services and Scavenging Services to various hospitals under the State Government as well as the Central Government – The services the A

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Sweeping Service that the Applicant supplies to the Housing Directorate of the Government of West Bengal, cannot be classified as an activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Classification of services – composite supply – the service of manufacturing tea bags from the physical inputs owned by the latter is the principal supply. It is classifiable under SAC 9988 and taxable at 5% rate – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Classification of goods – ‘Poly Propylene Leno Bags’ are to be classified as plastic bags under HSN 3923 and would attract 18% GST. – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – Classification of goods – Springs of Iron and Steel for Railways are classifiable under HSN Code no. 7320 (taxable @ 18% of GST) – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

2019 (2) TMI 685 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit – surrender of service tax registration – export of services – Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 – Held that:- The term “Total turnover” used in the above formula includes the sum total value of all excisable goods cleared during the relevant period. It doesn’t restrict the inclusion of value of the excisable goods exported, per se. Sub-rule (2) deals with a situation where duty drawback is allowed and further lays down that in such a situation, credit could not be refunded. Therefore, it is clear from the above that Rule 5 facilitates the refund of Cenvat credit not merely of the excisable goods exported and therefore to say that Rule 5 provides for refund of un-utilized Cenvat only in the cases of export of service is incorrect.
–
Accepting this interpretation of the Commissioner (Appeals) would lead to serious anomaly, which cannot be the intention o

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

016, on 25.07.2017. On verification of the refund claim, it came to the notice of the department that the appellants are not eligible for the refund claim since, according to the Asst. Commissioner, as per Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944, a refund of unutilized cenvat credit could be allowed only when the cenvat credit was related to services used for the export of services. A Show cause notice dated 21.11.2017 was thus issued proposing rejection of refund claim as they are not eligible for the refund of balance lying unutilized in their cenvat account at the time of closure of business. The appellant vide reply dated 03.01.2018 to the SCN replied that the refund claim was made because they had wound up their business and dissolved their partnership firm on 02.11.2016; had surrendered the service tax registration also on the same date; that they had also paid the service tax liability for the month of July, 2016 through cash as the

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Scheme and CCR, with a particular reference to Rule 5 of CCR, which provided only for refund in the case of excess credit remaining surplus on the only solitary account of export and not in any case of balance of cenvat credit lying unutilized and unusable consequent to closure of business. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. Hence, this appeal. 2. Ld. Counsel, Shri P. Ravindran, appeared for the assessee and submitted that such refund claim has been allowed by a catena of judicial pronouncements and such case laws on which reliance was placed were produced before both the lower authorities. The adjudicating authority had mis-construed the claim of the appellants as a claim for refund of the debit of tax made in cash whereas, the appellants had only claimed refund of unutilized cenvat credit lying in balance consequent to closure of their business. He submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the dictum laid down in t

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

h are cleared for export under bond or letter of undertaking, as the case may be, or used in the intermediate products cleared for export, the CENVAT credit in respect of the inputs so used shall be allowed to be utilized by the manufacturer towards payment of duty of excise on any final products cleared for home consumption or for export on payment of duty and where for any reason such adjustment is not possible, the manufacturer shall be allowed refund of such amount subject to such safeguards, conditions and limitations as may be specified by the Central Government by notification : Provided that no refund of credit shall be allowed if the manufacturer avails of drawback allowed under the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995, or claims a rebate of duty under the Central Excise Rules, 2002, in respect of such duty. 4.2 Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 facilitates refund of credit, to be worked out in the manner provided in the formula prescribed, under sub-rule (

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

with the Revenue; the appellant has surrendered its Service Tax Registration and they have also paid the service tax liability as on the last date of their business. The law cannot, therefore, lead to a situation where a bonafide tax payer s amount could be denied and withheld, for no fault of his. Further, in such a situation a bonafide assessee cannot be left remediless with his/its money in the form of credit struck with the Government. My view as above is also supported by the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. (supra), which decision has been followed by various judicial fora across the nation. 5. Further, when Article 265 of our Constitution mandates that no tax be impaled/ collected without the authority of law, it is incumbent upon the Revenue to justify even retention, when there is bonafide payment/credit. In this case, there is no allegation or not even a whisper about unjust enrichment: after rejecting appellan

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

2019 (2) TMI 833 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL – TMI – Classification of goods – PP Leno Bags – whether classified under Chapter 63 or under Chapter 39 of Tariff Act? – challenge to advance ruling decision.
–
Held that:- It is pertinent to mention that the Note 2(p) of the Chapter 39 of GST Tariff (plastics and Articles thereof) does not cover the goods of Section XI (Textiles & Textile Products). In the instant case, the impugned product, by no way of stretch of imagination, could be termed as Textiles or Textile Products. Therefore, unless the impugned goods have been manufactured from the material which qualifies as Textiles of the Chapter 63, it would not be proper to consider the same to be classifiable under Chapter 63053300 – the goods i.e., woven, knitted or crocheted fabrics, felt or nonwovens, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated, made from the plastics or articles thereof are excluded from the Section XI of Tariff Act. If the impugned goods were made

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

ces Tax Act, 2017/ Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Howrah CGST & CX Commissionerate. Present for the Appellant: Sri Dipankar Mukherjee, Superintendent (T&R), Central Tax, Howrah CGST & CX Commissionerate Present for the Respondent: Sri Vinay Kumar Shraff, Advocate This Appeal has been filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Howrah CGST & CX Commissionerate (hereinafter referred to as the Appellant ) on 05.11.2018 against Advance Ruling No. 19/WBAAR/2018-19 dated 28.09.2018, pronounced by the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling in the matter of M/s. RLJ Woven Sacks Pvt. Ltd. 2. M/S RLJ Woven Sacks Pvt. Ltd., holding GSTIN No. 19AABCJ8866B1ZD, a manufacturer of Polypropylene Leno Bags (PP Leno Bags) having its address at Flat IA, Radiant Park Building, 201, New Market Road, Kolkata-700017 in West Bengal (hereinafter referred to as the Respondent ), sought an Advance Ruling on the classification of PP

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

riff Act which covers textile and textile articles from Chapter 50 to 63 and does not include woven, knitted or crocheted fabrics of Chapter 39, hence the learned Advance Ruling authority has erred in interpreting the true essence of this Chapter Note. (ii) The learned Advance Ruling Authority has erred in reading the legality of the Section Note in so far as when every word in the above Chapter note is separated by comma then each word should be given equal weightage and from that perspective the word woven should have been considered as an exclusion word in its own right. Hence, the Advance Ruling is not legally tenable. (iii) The learned Advance Ruling Authority has failed to take note of the judgment delivered by the Hon ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of M/s. Raj Pack Well Ltd Vs Union of India referred in 1990 (50) ELT 201 (M.P) = 1989 (9) TMI 120 – HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE where the Hon ble High Court has observed in Para 21 that in the result we hold tha

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

t cogent why the taxpayer did not seek advance Ruling at any point of time, earlier. Under self-assessment regime, the taxpayer is the active agent in seeking such Ruling in case of doubts related to classification, or otherwise. The taxpayer s action of their seeking advance Ruling in this case and a sudden change in classification betrays their self- serving intent of taking undue advantage of a lower tax rate. This was also held by the Apex Court in Sri Babu Ram alias Durga Prasad vs. Sri Indra Pal Singh (Dead) by Irs., AIR 1998 SC 3021 = 1998 (8) TMI 605 – SUPREME COURT, and P.R.Deshpande vs. Maruti Balramhaibatti, AIR 1998 SC 2979 = 1998 (8) TMI 604 – SUPREME COURT wherein the Apex Court has observed that such a self-serving action or conduct violates the doctrine of estoppels. (v) The said taxpayer has relied on the classification given by the Bureau of Indian Standards to classify their products Leno bags under Chapter 63 only when the tax rate has been reduced to 5% against 18%

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA that such a Notification has to be interpreted in the light of the words employed by it and not on any other basis. This was so held in the context of the principle that in a taxing statute, there is no room for any intendment, that regard must be had to the clear meaning of the words and that the matter should be governed wholly by the language of the Notification, i.e, by plain terms of exemption. 5. During the course of the hearing the Appellant reiterated the points as stated in Grounds in Appeal. The Appellant also referred to an order passed in appeal by this forum on 25.10.2018 in Appeal Case No. 06/WBAAAR/Appeal/2018 = 2018 (11) TMI 663 – APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL wherein PP Leno Bags of similar description, manufactured by M/S Mega Flex Plastics Ltd., were classified under Tariff Heading 3923 29 90. 6. During the course of the hearing the Respondent opposed the appeal and submitted the following: (i) The Respondent pointed out

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

with plastics, or articles thereof, of Chapter 39 . It was further submitted that from the bare perusal of Chapter and Section notes it is clear that in order to be included in Chapter 63, the width of the tapes, manufactured from plastics or articles of Chapter 39, used to weave the fabric should be less than or equal to 5 mm and should not be impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics or articles thereof, of Chapter 39. (iii) It was further submitted that the Respondent manufacture PP Leno Bags specifically made from woven Polypropylene fabric using strips or the like of width not exceeding 5 mm and without any impregnation, coating, covering, or lamination with plastics and such bags were clearly classifiable under Tariff heading 6305 33 00 which includes sacks and bags of the kind used for packing of goods, made from polyethylene or polypropylene strips and the like that qualifies as man-made textile materials. It was further added that this Tariff heading is not appli

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

arlier the Leno bags in question were being classified by them under Chapter 39 instead of Chapter 63 not for claiming any benefit but out of ignorance but that does not operate as estoppels/ res judicata against them for claiming classification under the correct tariff/ subheading of GST Tariff. In support of this submission the Respondent referred to following judgments/ orders namely; a. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal Vs. Mahakoshal Potteries [2005 (183) ELT 289 (Tri-Dei)] = 2005 (2) TMI 183 – CESTAT, NEW DELHI b. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal Vs. Perfect Refractories [2005 (185) ELT 163 (Tri-Dei)) = 2005 (2) TMI 597 – CESTAT, NEW DELHI c. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-Ill Vs. Nozzle Auto Association Pvt. Ltd. [2013 (290) ELT 731 (Tri-Mumbai)] = 2011 (8) TMI 756 – CESTAT, MUMBAI d. Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Hyderabad-IV vs Lamtuf Plastics Ltd. [2016 (343) ELT 618 (Tri-Bang)] = 2015 (5) TMI 1094 – CESTAT BANGALORE e. Commissi

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

er, of polyethylene or polypropylene strip or the like Further Chapter 39 covers Plastics and Articles thereof . For sake of clarity the relevant text of Chapter Sub-Heading 3923 2990 is reproduced as under: 3923 Articles for the conveyance or packing of goods, of plastics; stoppers, lids, caps and other closures, of plastics …….. -Sacks and bags (including cones) 392329 -Of other plastics 39232990 Other From the plain reading of the above, it is evident from the above that to qualify under Chapter Sub-Heading 63053300 the goods i.e., Bags/ Sack should be made of man-made textile material of polyethylene or polypropylene strip or the like , whereas for qualification under the Chapter Sub-Heading 39232990 the goods i.e., Bags/ Sack should be made of plastics and articles thereof. In the instant case, as discussed in para 2 of Advance Ruling Order dated 28-09-2018, the Respondent used the raw materials like Polypropylene, Linear Low Density Polyethylene, Colour Master Batch

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

been manufactured from the material which qualifies as Textiles of the Chapter 63, it would not be proper to consider the same to be classifiable under Chapter 63053300. Further, Section Note 1 (h) of Section XI of the Tariff Act, specifically excludes: woven, knitted or crocheted fabrics, felt or nonwovens, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, or articles thereof, of Chapter 39; From the plain reading of the above Section Note, it transpires that the goods i.e., woven, knitted or crocheted fabrics, felt or nonwovens, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated, made from the plastics or articles thereof are excluded from the Section XI of Tariff Act. If the impugned goods were made of textile material of polypropylene, then only the same would be classifiable under Chapter 63 and the aforesaid fact is absent in the instant case. Therefore, the impugned goods cannot be classified under Chapter 63 and shall be classifiable under Chapter 39, as discussed supra. 10. The

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

same would be classifiable under Chapter 46. Hence, the above said Section Note 1 (g) of Section XI of the Tariff Act does not help the Respondent in the instant case. 11. The Respondent has also made references of Bureau of Indian Standards and Technical Textile Unit for substantiating the classification of the impugned goods under Chapter 63. However, it is pertinent to mention that the classifications of the goods shall always be determined in accordance to the relevant Section Notes and Chapter Notes of the GST Tariff Act. The Respondent failed to bring out any submissions as to how the aforesaid references i.e., Bureau of Indian Standards and Technical Textile Unit are relevant to the Section Notes and Chapter Notes of the GST Tariff Act to determine the classification of the impugned goods. 12. A different Bench of this Appellate Forum passed an Order dated 25.10.2018 and classified the impugned Item under Tariff Heading 39232990 in the case of M/s. Mega Flex Plastics Ltd. In sa

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

hellip;If the strip is a strip of plastic only and not a synthetic material and is also known in the common parlance as a commodity of plastic, and the finished goods that is the HOPE woven sacks are also known in the common parlance as plastic woven sacks, then it cannot be held that the strips with which such bags are woven are the strips of synthetic textile material. 14. The Respondent s intention to change the classification of the impugned goods appears to enjoy of the lower Tariff rate of GST. In this regard, on the similar issue, the Order of the Hon ble Supreme Court, in the matter of P.R. Deshpande vs. Maruti Balram Haibatti, as reported in AIR 1998 SC 2979 = 1998 (8) TMI 604 – SUPREME COURT, is relevant, wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has observed that : …….the doctrine of election is based on the rule of estoppel- the principle that one cannot approbate and reprobate inheres in it. The doctrine of estoppel by election is one of the species of estoppel in pa

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

cludes boxes, crates, cases, sacks and bags. 7.3 Further as per the Chapter note to Chapter 39, the expression plastics means those materials of heading 39.01 to 39.14 which are or have been capable, either at the moment of polymerization or at some subsequent stage, of being formed under external influence (usually heat and pressure, if necessary with a solvent of plasticizer) by moulding, casting, extruding, rolling or other process into shapes which are retained on the removal of the external influence. 7.4 Thus it is clarified that Polypropylene Woven and Non-Woven Bags and PP Woven and Non-Woven Bags laminated with BOPP would be classified as plastic bags under HS code 3923 and would attract 18% GST. From the above, it is evident that Polypropylene Leno Bags whether laminated with BOPP or not would be classified as plastic bags under HS code 3923 and would attract 18% GST. 14. In view of the above discussion we find that Polypropylene Leno Bags shall be classifiable under Heading

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

2019 (2) TMI 836 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Construction of Residential Complexes u/s 65 (91a) – Duty Demand – Waiver of Pre-deposit – Held that:- The appeal is allowed. – Appeal No. ST/440 to 442/2012 Dated:- 30-1-2019 – Hon ble Judicial Member : Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. And Hon ble Technical Member: Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar For Appellant : Ms. D.S. Vipula, Advocate For Respondent: Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) ORDER Appeals allowed. – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Manageme

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

2019 (2) TMI 1349 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – Time Limitation – Renting of immovable property service – Section 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944 – Held that:- As per Section 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944, Appeal before Commissioner(Appeals) can be filed within 60 days of the receipt of the copy of order by the appellant. Statute itself vide provision to Section 35 empowers Commissioner(Appeals) to condone the delay beyond 60 days on being satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting said appeal. But the extent of only 30 days of delay beyond said 60 days is statutorily provided to be condoned by the Commissioner(Appeals) – Since in the present matter the appeal before Commissioner(Appeals) was filed beyond 9

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

5.04.2015 proposing the recovery of service tax amounting to ₹ 5,24,815/- alongwith the interest at the appropriate rate and the proportionate penalty. The original adjudicating authority vide the order No. 08 dated 01.07.2016 has confirmed the demand alongwith the interest and the penalty. Being aggrieved the appeal was filed. Commissioner(Appeals) vide the order under challenge i.e. bearing No. 619 dated 28.03.2018 has dismissed the Appeal in limini for it to be barred by time as being filed beyond three months of receiving the Order-in-Original. 2. Mr. Puneet Sachdeva, consultant for the appellant has impressed upon that they had never collected and service tax while providing the impugned services as such were not liable to discha

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

missed the same only on the ground of limitation, it being filed before him after the expiry of period of three months (90 days). As per Section 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944, Appeal before Commissioner(Appeals) can be filed within 60 days of the receipt of the copy of order by the appellant. Statute itself vide provision to Section 35 empowers Commissioner(Appeals) to condone the delay beyond 60 days on being satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting said appeal. But the extent of only 30 days of delay beyond said 60 days is statutorily provided to be condoned by the Commissioner(Appeals). Since in the present matter the appeal before Commissioner(Appeals) was filed beyond 90 days that he was not empow

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

2019 (2) TMI 1479 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – common input services were used in the repair and maintenance of windmill situated away from their factory during the period March, 2015 to May, 2015 – non-maintenance of separate account of use of common input services – Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 – Held that:- Applicability of Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 squarely rests on the fact that whether the appellant availed CENVAT Credit on input services and used it for providing exempted services – In the present case, demand notices have been confirmed on the premise that the appellant have utilized common input services in the manufacture of dutiable goods and maintenance and repair of windmill.
–
The learned Commissioner (Appeals) categorically recorded the findings that the appellant failed to produce evidence to substantiate that credit availed on input services were not used exclusively in repair and maintenance of Wind Mills used for generation of ele

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

n various input services during the relevant period. Alleging that common input services were used in the repair and maintenance of windmill situated away from their factory during the period March, 2015 to May, 2015, demand notices were issued to them under Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 since they failed to maintain separate account of use of common input services. On adjudication, the demands of ₹ 75,976/- and ₹ 4,65,362/- were confirmed with interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed appeals before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, rejected the Appeals. Hence, the present appeals. 3. Learned consultant for the appellant submits that even though before the original adjudicating authority as well as before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) they have categorically and vehemently argued that common input services were not utilized in the generation of electricity at their windmill, however, invoking Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

services in the manufacture of dutiable goods and maintenance and repair of windmill. The contention of the learned Consultant for the appellant that in repair and maintenance of windmill situated away from the factory used for generation of electricity and ultimately consumed in the manufacture of excisable goods, no input services were used for such purpose and they had not availed credit on the same. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) categorically recorded the findings that the appellant failed to produce evidence to substantiate that credit availed on input services were not used exclusively in repair and maintenance of Wind Mills used for generation of electricity, which the appellant controverted before this Tribunal placing evidences. I am of the view that these evidences need to be scrutinized since not produced before the adjudicating authority. 7. In the result, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority to a

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – ORDER No. 1/2018 – Dated:- 30-1-2019 – GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR FINANCE (TAXATION) DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION ORDER No. 1/2018 The 30th January, 2019 No. FTX.56/2017/Pt-II/121.- WHEREAS, sub-section (1) of section 44 of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act; 2017 (Assam Act No. XXVIII of 2017) (hereafter in this Order referred to as the "said Act") provides that every registered person, other than an Input Service Distributor, a person paying tax under section 51 or section 52, a casual taxable person and a non-resident taxable person, shall furnish an annual return for every financial year electronically in such form and manner as may be prescribed on or before the thirty-first day of December follow

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =