Author: admin_gst

re GST on amount recovery
Query (Issue) Started By: – Madhavan iyengar Dated:- 4-3-2019 Last Reply Date:- 11-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 6 Replies
GST
A company has recovered Certain sums basic amount and interest from vendor these amounts are certain taxes of earlier law which was not paid by the vendor to the company and in companys assessment the ITC of earlier law was disallowed
query is gst applicable on the recovery of basic amount of taxes and the interest
Reply By PAWAN KUMAR:
The Reply:
Dear Sir,
As per my view, the same will be subject to GST. As per valuation section 15 of CGST act, any tax, duty, cess fee and any other charges of any law other than SGST, UTGST, GST(Compensation to states) Act shall be liable to be includible in value of supply of goods or services or both. Interest, late fee , penalty in respect of supply of goods or services shall also be laible to be include in value for charging GST.
Reply By SHARAD ANADA:
The Reply:
Firs

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

it under the existing law and inadmissible transitional credit through Table 4(B)(2) of FORM GSTR-3B. The applicable interest and penalty shall apply on all such reversals which shall be paid through entry in column 9 of Table 6.1 of FORM GST-3B.
6.2 Amended Para 3.
It may be noted that all such liabilities may be discharged by the taxpayers, either voluntarily in FORM GST DRC-03 or may be recovered vide order uploaded in FORM GST DRC-07, and payment against the said order shall be made in FORM GST DRC-03. It is further clarified that the alternative method of reversing the wrongly availed CENVAT credit under the existing law and inadmissible transitional credit through Table 4(B)(2) of FORM GSTR-3B would no longer be available to taxpayers. The applicable interest and penalty shall apply in respect of all such amounts, which shall also be paid in FORM GST DRC-03.
Reply By Madhavan iyengar:
The Reply:
Dear Sirs sharadji and pawanji thanks for the detailed analysis but iam once agai

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pavan Mahulkar. GST is payable.
Reply By Spudarjunan S:
The Reply:
Dear Sir,
Reply to your Query + explanation provided:-
I'm on the view that there is no supply in this transaction as the same is transaction in money. No requirement to pay GST on the same.
Grounds for opinion :-
W.e.f from 01.02.2019 – Schedule II of CGST Act can't be used for determining the transaction whether it is supply or not. It is only to classify whether the supply is supply of goods or services.
The clause (e) of Sl.no.5 of Schedule II of CGST Act sounds like a residuary clause as it mentions agreeing to the obligation to refrain from an act, or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act which can be interpreted in a way to cover even transaction in monies. Before classifying a supply under this head a detailed analysis and great care has to be taken.
I'm re-iterating your case in some other manner for better understanding – you made payment to vendor for purchase of 100 units but

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ITC ELEGIBILITY ONLY IF AVAILABLE GSTR-2A
Query (Issue) Started By: – SAFETAB LIFESCIENCE Dated:- 4-3-2019 Last Reply Date:- 14-6-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 7 Replies
GST
Dear Experts,
We have received a letter from GST range seeking clariification for the variation between our GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A. Some of the suppliers have not uploaded their bills and every one aware that this difference is due to suppliers non uploading only. But we have pucca GST paid bills.
At this stage, we want to know whether we are eligible to take ITC only if it is displayed in 2A compulsorily and is it mandatory. What we can do if our party is not uploading their bills. Is there any rules or notification are there stating only and only we can take ITC if available in GSTR-2A only.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Uploading invoices by the supplier is not the basic condition. It is not mandatory. Section 16 of CGST Act does not talk of such condition. Also read the following:
C.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of all invoices.
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani:
The Reply:
The input tax credit taken by the buyer is on self assessment basis. There is no compulsion as of now to match the invoice appearing in GSTR-2A with the details uploaded by the supplier in his GSTR-1. However, as rightly said by Sri Kasturi Sir, the onus of claiming the credit is upon the buyer. Also, both buyer and supplier is jointly and severely responsible for the input tax credit in the sense that if GST is paid by the supplier and the details are uploaded in GST portal the credit becomes eligible to the buyer. The new return format is going to come from 01.04.2019 wherein the credit would be autopopulted in the return which is based on the invoice uploaded by the supplier. After trail month it will be made compulsory that only such credit which is populating in the return would be eligible for the buyer to claim.However, presently there is no such restriction of the buyer to claim credit only if it is appearing in his GSTR-

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ist, I stick to my views.
Reply By Shyam Kedia:
The Reply:
Dear Kasturi sir,
Are you sure that if credits are not available in 2A but the recipient has invoice with him and has a proof that he has paid the considerations along with tax amount to the supplier, then the recipient can claim credit based in the invoice he is having? i ask it more firmly we need to file gst annual returns now before june and this plays a mojor role.
Also will the department be satisfied if the recipient furnishes all invoices with proof of payment to supplier in case any credit is not available in 2A?
Your reply will be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
It is not in dispute that all the invoices are to be uploaded by the supplier in GSTR-1 on the basis of which ITC is reflected in GSTR-2A. You are to pursue your supplier to upload the invoices. The Common Portal System will allow ITC whichever is reflected in GSTR-2A.If the supplier does not upload the invoices

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. Versus CGST, Excise & Customs, BBSR
Customs
2019 (3) TMI 453 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI
CESTAT KOLKATA – AT
Dated:- 4-3-2019
MA (EH)-77675-77687/18 & Cus. Appeal Nos.75850-75862/18 – MO/75133-75145/2019 & FO/75233-75245/2019
Customs
SHRI P.K. CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And SHRI V. PADMANABHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Shri S. C. Mohanty, Advocate for the Appellant (s)
Shri S. Guha, Asstt. Commr. (AR) for the Revenue
ORDER
Per Shri P. K. Choudhary:
The present Misc. Applications are for early hearing of the Cus. Appeal Nos.75850-75862/18, which have been filed against the Orders-in-Appeal Nos.47-59/CUS/CCP-GST/2017 dt.22.12.2017, passed by Commr. (Appeals) GST, Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar.
2. After carefully considering the reasons as cited in the applications, the early hearing is allowed. With the concurrence of both sides, the appeals itself are taken up for decision.
3. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

quantity rebate and price discount, which can only be ascertained at the end of the contract period. The above factual aspects are admitted by the authorities below, and therefore, those are not under dispute. Since the quantity rebate/price discount was not known at the time of import, the imported goods were cleared on payment of duty, on the basis value shown by the overseas supplier, in the bill of lading.
6. After completion of the contract period, and as a result of price negotiation between the parties, the quantity rebate/price discounts were determined. Thereafter, the appellant raised debit notes on the foreign suppliers, consequent upon which the differential amount was refunded to the appellant, through the authorised banking channel. This fact is also not under dispute. In all the thirteen cases, the bills of entry were presented, following the self assessment procedure in terms of Section 17 (1) of the customs Act, 1962 and customs duty was accordingly paid on the value

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he duty already paid by the appellant.
8. The Assistant Commissioner, relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (S.C.) and Priya Blue Industries 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.), had held that since the appellant did not challenge the assessment of bill of entry by filling appeal against the same, Refund Applications are not maintainable. Aggrieved by the adjudication orders of the Assistant Commissioner, the appellant filed appeals before the commissioner (Appeals), which were rejected by the impugned common order, against which the present appeals are filed before this Hon'ble Tribunal.
9. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that the refund claim was rejected mainly on the ground that the assessment made by the appellant in the Bill of Entry reached its finality, which they have not challenged.
10. The lower authorities followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Priya Blue Industries

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

sidered at the time of assessment. Decision taken by the Department for non-consideration of the refund application filed after finalization of assessment and return of the same under the cover of letter dated 24-8-2011, assigning the reason of premature and not maintainable, in our considered opinion, would give rise to the cause of action for filing appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Since, the decision of the adjudicating authority has been conveyed in the letter dated 24- 8-2011, it can be concluded that the said letter is only detriment to the interest of the respondent, against which the appeal was preferred before the Commissioner (Appeals). Appeal against the said letter having been filed within a period of sixty days from the date of its communication in our opinion, there is no delay in filing appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, we do not find any merits in the contention of Revenue that filing of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) is barred b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ibid, in our view is in conformity with the statutory provisions.
7. The judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd. (supra) cited by Revenue in their grounds of appeal is distinguishable from the facts of the present case inasmuch as the duty in such case was paid by the importer in pursuance of an assessment order and the Hon'ble Supreme Court have ruled that so long as the order of assessment stands, the duty would be payable as per that order of assessment and refund claim is not an appeal proceeding. Contrary is the case in hand, wherein the respondent was not aggrieved by the order of assessment inasmuch as on the basis of information furnished by it in the Bill of Entry, the same was assessed by the Customs Department. Thus, there was no scope on the part of the respondent to file any appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the assessed Bill of Entry. Further, the alternative provided in Section 27 ibid, i.e., 'borne by him' was not the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ich allows him payment of concessional rate of duty merely after filing a Bill of Entry. In fact, such a case is the present case in which there is no assessment order for being challenged in the appeal which is passed under Section 27(1)(i) of the Act because there is no contest or lis and hence no adversarial assessment order.
The Tribunal has referred to the cases of 5. CCE, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2000 (120) E.L.T. 285] and Priya Blue Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.). In both these cases, referred to by the Tribunal there was an assessment order which was passed and consequently it was held that where an adjudicating authority passed an order which is appealable and the party did not choose to exercise the statutory right of appeal, it is not open to the party to question the correctness of the order of the adjudicating authority subsequently by filing a claim for refund on the ground that adjudicating authority had

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refunds for Unutilized Cenvat Credit Post-GST Must Be Issued in Cash, Not Credited Back to Account.
Case-Laws
Central Excise
Refund of unutilized amount lying in Cenvat credit account post GS

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST ITC on AMC
Query (Issue) Started By: – Madhavan iyengar Dated:- 2-3-2019 Last Reply Date:- 3-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 8 Replies
GST
A Company has received an Invoice for AMC bill for period January 2018 to December 2018 towards maintenance services. Company has made the entire payment in the month of January 2018
Issue: Can the Company avail the entire GST-ITC as mentioned in the AMC in the month of January 2018.
Reply By CASusheel Gupta:
The Reply:
Yes, can be claimed
In case of goods also, we take ITC at the time of inward supply irrespective of actual date of consumption.
Reply By Madhavan iyengar:
The Reply:
but one of the conditions to avail itc in gst law is that the company should have received

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

supposed to come quarterly to check the inverter. But the date and sometime month is also changes as per availability of me and sometime his. Similarly in case of yours can you maintain a log as to when he is giving service in terms of AMC. If yes take credit when service is received . otherwise it can be safely decided that credit can be taken on the receipt of invoice .
Reply By CASusheel Gupta:
The Reply:
Suppose I purchase an AC on 31.03.2018
It am entitled to one AC (goods received), one year warranty (shall be availed in next year) and three free service coupon (shall be availed in next year) .
How to apportion now between these three.
I believe unless the stakes are high, we can take credit on receipt of invoice. At the most a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

E WAY BILL.
Query (Issue) Started By: – HIMANSHU SHRIMALI Dated:- 2-3-2019 Last Reply Date:- 5-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
* is E Way Bill required to be generate
if i issue 4 invoice of ₹ 20000/-each (80,000)to same receipeant, same tranporter.?
Whether provision of Rajasthan E Way Bill (intra – state i.e. movement of goods with in Rajasthan) is same as of CGST ?
I tried a lot to get amended E Way Bill provision of Rajasthan GST but failed.
1. is E Way Bill required to be generate by the supplier or recipient :
if i issue 4 invoice of ₹ 20000/-each (80,000) to same recipient, same transporter?
2. Whether provision of Rajasthan E Way Bill (intra – state i.e. movement of goods wit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d conveyance carries goods more than 50K then transporter is required to generate e way bill if supplies or recepient has not gererated e way bill. Please refer Rule 138(7) of CGST Rule 2017. The same is reproduced here under for your ready reference
7) Where the consignor or the consignee has not generated the e-way bill in FORM GST EWB-01 and the aggregate of the consignment value of goods carried in the conveyance is more than fifty thousand rupees, the transporter, except in case of transportation of goods by railways, air and vessel, shall, in respect of inter-State supply, generate the e-way bill in FORM GST EWB-01 on the basis of invoice or bill of supply or delivery challan, as the case may be, and may also generate a consolidated

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

‘INTERMEDIARY SERVICES’ CANNOT BE CLASSIFIED AS ‘EXPORT OF SERVICES’
By: – DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 2-3-2019

Intermediary
The term 'intermediary' is defined under section 2(13) of the IGST Act as a broker, an agent, or any other person, by whatever name called, who arranges or facilitates the supply of goods or services or both, or securities, between two or more persons, but does not include a person who supplies such goods or services or both or securities on his own account.
From the above definition it can be inferred that an intermediary can be a broker, an agent or any other person who arranges and facilitates the supply of goods and/or services between two or more persons and who cannot change the nature of supply as provided by the principal.
An intermediary cannot alter the nature or value of the service, the supply of which he facilitates on behalf of his principal, although the principal may authorize the inter

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

as go-between his principal and his principal's customers. Thus, aforesaid activities of the appellant clearly in the nature of arranging or facilitating supply of goods by foreign entity to customers in India, the same is considered to be as intermediary services as defined under section 2(13) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 particularly when he is not supplying goods neither on behalf of the principal or on his own account but the same is supplied by the principal, a foreign entity. Therefore the Appellate Authority held that the contention of the appellant that promotion and marketing services provided by him to such foreign entity on his account, excluded from purview of the definition of 'intermediary service' is not acceptable.
Intermediary services – Export of services?
Section 2(6) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ('IGST Act' for short) defines the expression 'export of services' as the supply of services, when-
(i) the supplier of service

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

stinct persons.
Whether the intermediary services amount to export of services? For this question the answer is given in the following case laws-
In re 'Vishakhar Prashant Bhave' – 2018 (12) TMI 227 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA the question for which advance ruling was sought is as to whether the commission received by the applicant in convertible foreign exchange for rendering services as an intermediary between an exporter abroad receiving such services and an Indian importer of an equipment is an 'export of service' falling under section 2(6) of IGST Act and outside the purview of section 13(8)(b) attracting zero rated tax under section 16(1)(a) of IGST Act. The AAR held that since the place of supply of services in this case is in taxable territory, the said intermediary services cannot be treated as export of services under the provisions of GST laws.
In re 'Global Reach Education Services Private Limited' – 2018 (8) TMI 392 – APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULI

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the applicant gets a positive response from the subscriber, they scan the credentials and the business potential of the subscriber to whom it is proposed to market the CRS software. Based on the organizational and workflow analysis of the subscriber and following a back ground check of their prior activities, the applicant logs on a request into the system through the website maintained by Sabre APAC called Subscriber Communication Management System. If the subscriber agrees to use the CRS software, order forms are collected from them to begin the process for activation of the CRS Software. Once the subscriber is registered successful and a Pseudo City Code is allotted in its favor. Once the code is allotted and the setup is activated the applicant's engineers install user interfaces to access the CRS Software in the subscriber's computer systems.
The Authority found that the job of the applicant is to scout for the subscribers in India. The applicant explains and educates the subscri

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Kunte as =
Sir
Nice enlightening article. Can you also please confirm that the Tax on such intermediary Services to a foreign clients needs to charged under CGST+SGST or only IGST?
As per my understanding / interpretation under provisions of Section 8(2) read with Section 12, the Tax is to be paid under IGST.
Is this interpretation correct? Please confirm or correct my interpretation in this respect.
With Regards,
Dated: 4-3-2019
Reply By KASTURI SETHI as =
It is inter-State supply. IGST applicable. Excellent Article by Dr.Govindarajan, Sir.
Dated: 5-3-2019
Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN as =
As mentioned by Shri Sethi IGST applicable. Thanks both of you for your good comments on my article.
Dated: 5-3-2019
Reply By ChandrakantBacharam Ghevade as =
What is state code to be mentioned in invoice
Dated: 30-4-2019
Reply By KASTURI SETHI as =
The code of that State is to be mentioned on the invoice in which State the supplier of intermediary service is located.
Date

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

The Union Minister of Finance and Corporate Affairs, Shri Arun Jaitley releases a Compendium of Instructions on GST Refunds and a Copy of the Operational Manual on Internal Audit
GST
Dated:- 1-3-2019

On the occasion of 43rd Foundation Day of the Indian Civil Accounts Service (ICAS), the Controller General of Accounts (CGA) and his team of senior officers along with the Expenditure Secretary, Shri G.C. Murmu called on the Union Minister of Finance and Corporate Affairs, Shri Arun Ja

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Total GST Revenue collection of 97,247 crore for the month of February 2019
GST
Dated:- 1-3-2019

Total gross GST revenue collected in the month of February, 2019 is ₹ 97,247 crore of which CGST is ₹ 17,626crore, SGST is ₹ 24,192crore, IGST is ₹ 46,953crore (including ₹ 21,384crore collected on imports) and Cess is ₹ 8,476 crore (including ₹ 910crore collected on imports). Total number of GSTR 3B Returns filed for the month of January up to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

TAX IMPLICTIONS ON RE-IMPORT
Query (Issue) Started By: – RAMESH M Dated:- 1-3-2019 Last Reply Date:- 3-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
We exported our automobile material with payment of IGST, Due to some techinical issue the exported materials were rejected. we have to RE-IMPORT the above material. If there is any tax implication while RE-IMPORT the same.
We also availed the all export benefits like DBK / MEIS / IGST refund for above export shipments
Shall we repay the availed above export benefits to GOVT ? or any other customs duty shall we pay additionally.
Any suggestions Please…
M.RAMESH
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
All export benefits have to be given back to Govt. and normal procedure

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

supply to Goverment
Query (Issue) Started By: – NILESH PITALE Dated:- 1-3-2019 Last Reply Date:- 5-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
Respected Concern Authority
Our Client received Contract of ( Work Design, Fabrication,Supply, Installation,Testing,& Commissioning Heavy Duty Back Rake type Mechanical Screen) from Goverment Authority,
Question No-1: Can we consider it Composit Supply and Changed it 12% , if Not then 18% ?
Question No: 2: If we awarded said contact to Sub -contractor then he will charged us 12% As per Notification No. 1/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.1.2018
Question 3: If As per above notification tax Rate 12% then , I guess Our contact is chargeable at 18%
Please Guide us what we shoul

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Osmosis plant along with its installation, commissioning and operation and maintenance is a single supply.
According to definition of works contract under GST regime, the supply of goods and services are done by the supplier simultaneously which is for immovable property. Hence in works contract supply of goods and services together is compulsory – Thus, based on above facts and concept such contract shall be a single supply and cannot be treated as distinct supplies. Since all the conditions of composite supply are satisfied, it is a composite supply.
The activity proposed to be undertaken is a composite supply of works contract, the rate of tax in given service shall be determined in accordance with the Notification No 11/2017-CT (Rate)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Exploring CST Reduction or Exemption Benefits Post-GST for High-Speed Diesel in Manufacturing u/s 8(3.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of CST – Benefit of lower CST or exemption from CST post GST – Procurement of high speed diesel oil for manufacturing – the question whether the finished goods would also have to be amongst the six retained goods for the purpose of applying the provisions of Section 8(3) of the Act, need not be answered for the present.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marq

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Doubly taxed service under Service Tax Act & GST Act. Also output of Service Tax on advance payment wrongly taken as input in TRAN 1.
Query (Issue) Started By: – Vaibhav Bhala Dated:- 1-3-2019 Last Reply Date:- 5-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
Respected Sir
We have received an advance in pre-GST regime for service tax and we duly paid service tax on it. The services were to be rendered after 01-07-2017 i.e. post-GST induction. As we were unaware of GST provisions at that time we charged GST at the actual time of supply of services and it was duly deposited with Government. Since it was doubly taxed we took credit of earlier service tax paid in TRAN-1.
But now we realized that as per Sec. 142(11)(b) of C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

REDUCTION IN DISCOUNT IS NOT PROFITEERING: GST
By: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 1-3-2019

Can reduction in discount offered by supplier of goods resulting in increase in price amounts to profiteering in contravention of section 171 of CGST Act, 2017 ? The answer is NO, as affirmed by National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA).
In Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering and DGAP, CBIC, New Delhi v. Asian Paints Ltd., Kerala 2019 (1) TMI 21 – NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY ; , the NAA, vide its Order dated 27.12.2018, has ordered that where base price is increased due to reduction in discount, it does not amount to profiteering as discount is offered from the profit margin whic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, taxes etc:
Particulars
Period
Details
Reference
Pre-GST
Post-GST
1.
Product Description
A
Paint (AP Apex Classic WT 10 LT (HSN Code 3209)
2.
Invoice No.
B
13006429
KR1701110400
3.
Invoice Date
C
20.06.2017
09.11.2017
4.
MRP as per Annexure-7 (Rs.)
D
2.610
2,660
5.
Price before discount per unit (Rs.)
E
2,159
1,927
6.
Discount per unit (Rs.)
F
75.57
67.45
7.
Price after discount per unit (Rs.)
G=E-F
2,083.43
1,859.55
8.
Central Excise Duty @12.5% on 70% of MRP (Rs.)
H=(D*70%)*12.5%
228.38
–
9.
Base Price (Excluding duties & taxes) (Rs.)
I=G-H
1,855.05
1,859.55
10.
Tax Rate Charged (%)
J
14.50% VAT
28% GST
11.
Tax Amount (VAT or GST) (Rs.)
K=G*J
302.10
520.67
12.
Tota

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

.24% which was primarily on account of the reduction in the discount and such an increase couldn't qualify as profiteering due to reduction in the tax rate, thus, the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 relating to profiteering were not contravened in the instant case.
The NAA based on DGAP report, invoices etc, examined whether there was any reduction in the GST rate and whether the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax was passed on or not to the recipient as provided under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017. It observed that supplier had increased the base price of the product from ₹ 1855.05/- to ₹ 1859.55/- resulting in an increase of ₹ 4.50/-. In this context, it was clear that the post-GST price

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Complete analysis of Supplementary (Debit note and Credit note) invoices and Input Tax Credit
By: – Sandeep Rawat
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 1-3-2019

SUPPLEMENTARY INVOICES AND THEIR USES
Supplementary tax invoice has not been defined under GST law. Supplementary tax invoice is a type of invoice that is issued by a taxable person in case where any deficiency is found in a tax invoice already issued by a taxable person. It can be in form of a debit note or a credit note.
ISSUANCE OF CREDIT NOTE
A supplier of services is mandatorily required to issue a tax invoice. However, during the course of trade or commerce, after the invoice has been issued there could be situations like:
* The supplier has erroneously declared a value which is more than the actual value of the services provided.
* The supplier has erroneously declared a higher tax rate than what is applicable for the kind of the services supplied.
* The quality services supplied is not to the sa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ued there could be situations like:
* The supplier has erroneously declared a value which is less than the actual value of the goods or services or both provided.
* The supplier has erroneously declared a lower tax rate than what is applicable for the kind of the goods or services or both supplied.
* The quantity received by the recipient is more than what has been declared in the tax invoice.
* Any other similar reasons.
In order to regularize these kinds of situations the supplier is allowed to issue what is called as debit note to the recipient.
Any registered person who issues a debit note in relation to a supply of services, shall declare the details of such debit note in the return for the month during which such debit note has been issued and the tax liability shall be adjusted in such manner as may be prescribed
DETAILS REQUIRED TO BE SHOWN
There is no prescribed format for credit/debit note issued by a supplier. However, it must contain certain prescribed partic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

or his authorized representative.
OTHER PROVISION
As per Section 33 of CGST Act 2017, every person who is liable to pay tax shall indicate in all documents relating to assessment, tax invoice or other like documents, the amount of tax.
INPUT TAX CREDIT
As per section 16(1) of GST law, no registered taxable person shall be entitled to the credit of any input tax in respect of any supply of goods and/or services to him unless he is in possession of tax invoice, debit note, supplementary invoice or such other taxpaying document as may be prescribed, issued by a supplier registered under the CGST/SGST or the IGST Act.
As per section 16(1) & 16(2) of GST law, The registered person will be entitled to the credit of any input tax in respect of any supply of goods and/or services to him only if ALL the following five conditions are fulfilled:
(a)Possession of tax paying document [Section 16(2)(a) read with rule 36 of the CGST Rules]ITC can be availed on the basis of any of the follo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Adil Asagar Versus State Of U.P. And Another
GST
2019 (3) TMI 168 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 1-3-2019
Writ – A No. – 235 of 2019
GST
Pankaj Mithal And Saumitra Dayal Singh JJ.
For the Petitioner : Pawan Kumar
For the Respondent : C.S.C.,Nagendra Nath Mishra
ORDER
Heard Sri Nikhil Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri CB. Tripathi for the respondents.
The writ petition is directed against the order passed under Section 7

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering, Director General of Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs Versus M/s Velbon Vitrified Tiles Pvt. Ltd.
GST
2019 (3) TMI 370 – THE NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – TMI
THE NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – NAPA
Dated:- 1-3-2019
13/2019
GST
Sh. B. N. Sharma, Chairman, Sh. J. C. Chauhan, Technical Member, Ms. R. Bhagyadevi, Technical Member And Sh. Amand Shah, Technical Member
For the Applicant : Smt. A. Shainamol, Additional Commissioner, SGST, Kerala, Sh. Anwar Ali, Additional Commissioner, DG Anti-Profiteering
ORDER
1. The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant No. 1, vide the minutes of its meeting held on 08.05.2018 had referred the present case to the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, alleging profiteering by M/S Velbon Vitrified Tiles Pvt. Ltd., Unchi Mandal, Morbi, Gujarat “Ceramic Vitrified Tiles” Nano Series PRE-I (HSN Code 69072100) (hereafter called a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

port has stated that vide Notification No. 41/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017 the GST rate on the product “Ceramic Vitrified Tiles” Nano Series PRE-I (HSN Code 69072100) was reduced to 18% from the existing rate of 28% w.e.f 15.11.2017. Based on scrutiny of the two invoices issued by the Respondent, the pre & post GST rate reduction sale invoice-wise details of the said product are furnished in the table below by the DGAP:-
Table
Description of the Product
Pre-revision (Before 15.11.2017)
Post-revision (After 15.11.2017)
Difference in Price (Rs.)
Invoice No./Date
Tax Rate
Base Price per Box Excluding GST (Rs.)
Invoice no./Date
Tax Rate
Base Price per Box Excluding GST (Rs.)
Ceramic Vitrified Tiles 600X600 Nano Series pre-I (HSN code 69072100
0651 dated 24.10.17
28%
Rs. 232.50/-
0860 dated 15.12.17
18%
Rs. 232.50/-
–
5. The DGAP after examining the above invoices has submitted that there was no increase in the per unit taxable amount (excluding GST) of the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

dated 12.12.2018 passed under Rule 133 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, had directed the DGAP to investigate the above issue and send his Report accordingly.
8. The DGAP has submitted his Report on 24.12.2018 under Rule 133 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, and has stated that the present case was covered by Annexure-6 of the minutes of the meeting held by the Applicant No. 1, alleging profiteering by the manufacturer/wholesalers by the Respondent in pursuant to GST rate reduction w.e.f. 15.11.2017, in respect of supply of tiles to M/S Sooraj Tiles. The Report has also stated that Kerala GST officers had conducted enquiries from M/S Sooraj Tiles, Palakkad, Kerala and had procured the latter's purchase and sale invoices, however, as profiteering had been alleged against the Respondent the purchase invoices of M/S Sooraj Tiles have been relied upon, which were the sale invoices of the Respondent.
9. We have carefully considered the DGAP's Report and the documents placed on record and f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Systematic Conscom Ltd. Versus State Of U.P. And 2 Others
GST
2019 (3) TMI 374 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 1-3-2019
Writ Tax No. – 235 of 2019
GST
Pankaj Mithal And Saumitra Dayal Singh JJ.
For the Petitioner : Nikhil Agrawal
For the Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
Heard Sri Nikhil Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri CB. Tripathi for the respondents.
The writ petition is directed against the order passed under Section 73

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering, Director General Anti-Profiteering, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs Versus M/s Kajaria Ceramics Ltd.
GST
2019 (3) TMI 429 – NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – TMI
NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – NAPA
Dated:- 1-3-2019
Case No. 14/2019
GST
Sh. B. N. Sharma, Chairman, Sh. J. C. Chauhan, Technical Member, Ms. R. Bhagyadevi, Technical Member And Amand Shah, Technical Member
Ms. A. Shainamol, Additional Commissioner, SGST, Kerala for the Applicant No. 1.
Sh. Anwar Ali T.P., Additional Commissioner for the Applicant No. 2.
ORDER
1. The brief facts of the case are that The Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering vide the minutes of its meeting held on 08.05.2018 had referred the present case to the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, alleging profiteering by the Respondent on the supply of 'Caribbean Wood Tile' (here-in referred to as the product) by not passing o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

entral Excise Duty @ 12.5% of the 60% of the MRP and there was no VAT or CST charged in the invoice whereas after implementation of the GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017, the tax rate of GST on the said product was fixed at 28%. The DGAP has further furnished the pre-GST & the post-GST sale invoice-wise details of the applicable tax rate and base price (excluding CST or GST) of the said product supplied by the Respondent in the table given below:-
Period
Pre-GST (prior to 01.07.2017)
Post-GST (post 01.07.2017)
Description of the product supplied
Caribbean Wood Tile
Invoice No. & Date
2217100715 dated 27.04.2017
4417101296 dated 25.08.2017
MRP Per Box
800
800
Base price (in Rs.)
489.60
468
Excise Duty (12.5% on 40% of MRP)
60
Nil
Base Price (excluding Duties and Taxes)
429.60
468
GST
Nil
28%
Total Tax Rate
13.97%
28%
5. After scrutiny of the above two invoices issued by the Respondent, the DGAP has intimated that the rate of tax on the product was 13.97% in the pre-GST er

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

namol, Additional Commissioner, SGST, Kerala appeared on behalf of the Applicant No. 1 on 31.10.2018. During the hearing, it was observed that the DGAP report had not considered the MRP and base price (excluding VAT) of the product in question.
7. The Authority accordingly vide its letter dated 13.12.2018 had returned the report to the DGAP for re-investigation on the above mentioned issue under Rule 133(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
8. The DGAP vide his Report dated 20.12.2018 has submitted that as per Annexure-7 of the minutes of the Kerala Screening Committee dated 08.05.2018, profiteering was alleged against the Respondent, after introduction of GST w.e.f. 01.07.2017. The DGAP has further stated that the Respondent is listed at Sr. no. 77 of Annexure 7 to the minutes of the meeting of State level Screening Committee of Kerala dated 14.05.2018 wherein it was mentioned that the product attracts VAT @ 14.50%. On scrutiny of pre-GST invoice no. 2217100715 dated 27.04.2017, referred to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

from 13.97% to 28%. Hence, Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017, is not attracted.
10. We have carefully examined the report of the DGAP and the documents placed on record and find that the only issue that needs to be dwelled upon is as to whether there was reduction in the rate of tax on the product in question after introduction of GST and whether the provisions of section 171 of CGST Act, 2017, are attracted. Perusal of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017, reads as under:-
(1). “Any reduction in rate of tax on any supply of goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit shall be passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices.”
11. On perusal of the facts of the case and the details provided in the table given above in para 4 it is apparent that there was no reduction of tax with the introduction of GST. The DGAP on examining various facts has categorically mentioned that the invoices very clearly show that no VAT was levied and CST was also exempted prior

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Re: M/s. Nash Industries (I) Pvt. Ltd.
GST
2019 (3) TMI 435 – APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA – 2019 (23) G. S. T. L. 367 (App. A. A. R. – GST), [2020] 73 G S.T.R. 308 (AAAR)
APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA – AAAR
Dated:- 1-3-2019
KAR/AAAR/07/2018-19
GST
SRI D.P. NAGENDRAKUMAR, SRI SRIKAR M.S., MEMBER
PROCPEDINGS
(Under Section 101 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the KGST Act are pari materia and have the same provisions in like matters, and differ from each other only on a few specific provisions; therefore; unless a mention is particularly made to such a dissimilar provision, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the corresponding similar provisions under the KGST Act.
The present appeal has been filed under section 100 of the Central Goods and

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ion 98 of the CGST Act, 2017 and KGST Act, 2017 on the following question:
a. Whether the amortized cost of the tools is to be added to arrive at the value of the goods supplied for the purpose Of GST under Section 15 of the CGST Act read with Rule 27 of CGST Rules.
3. The Karnataka Authority for Advance Ruling, vide Advance Ruling No. NO. KAR ADRG 24/2018 dated 25th October 2018 = 2018 (11) TMI 607 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, KARNATAKA. (hereinafter referred to as 'Impugned Order) gave the following ruling:
“The amortised cost of tools which are re-supplied back to the applicant free of cost shall be added to the value of the components while calculating the value of the components supplied as per Section 15 of the CGST/KGST Act,2017.”
4. Aggrieved by the said ruling of the Authority, the applicant has filed an appeal under section 100 of the CGST Act, 2017 / KGST Act, 2017 on the following grounds:
4.1. The appellant submitted that the purchase order provided by the recip

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

are provided on FOC basis by the OEM to the component manufacturer in the course or furtherance of his business, there is no requirement for reversal of input tax credit availed on such moulds and dies by the OEM.
1.2. It is further clarified that while calculating the value of the supply made by the component manufacturer , the value of moulds and dies provided by the OEM to the component manufacturer on FOC basis shall not be added to the value of such supply because the cost of moulds/dies was not to be incurred by the component manufacturer and thus, does not merit inclusion in the value of supply in terms of Section 15(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act for short)
1.3. However, if the contract between OEM and component manufacturer was for supply of components made by using the moulds/dies belonging to the Component manufacturer, but the same have been supplied by the OEM to the component manufacturer on FOC basis; the amortised cost of such moulds/d

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ted that in the instant case,
a. The obligation of the supply of tools is on recipient/customer.
b. Accordingly, the owner of the tool is recipient /customers.
c. The recipient /customer provided the purchase order to appellant, wherein the scope is merely supply of components.
From the above it is evident that the present case falls under the first situation explained in the above circular. That means, the tool is owned by the OEM (Customer) and supplied at free of cost to appellant. Further, the purchase order is provided for supply of component. As the present case falls under first situation, the cost of the tool is not to be added to the price of component as per the clarification provided by the board.
4.5. Further, they submitted that the cost of the tool is required to be added only if the tool is belonging to the component manufacturer (Appellant). In the present case, the owner of the tool is the recipient / customer and hence the cost of tool is not required to be add

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

llected on the activity of the manufacture, whereas the levy of GST is on the supply of goods/services. Further, the scope of supply depends on the scope of the agreement and obligation of the supplier in the agreement. If there is no obligation on the supplier on any aspect, such aspect cannot be constituted as supply and also cannot be considered as value of supply.
4.8. In view of the above submissions, the Appellant pleaded that the ruling of the Authority for Advance Ruling is required to be modified.
Personal Hearing:
5. The Appellant was called for a personal hearing on 19.02.2019 and were represented by Shri. Rajesh Kumar T.R, Chartered Accountant. He reiterated the submissions made in the grounds of appeal. The representative also filed additional submissions before this Authority wherein they stated that the Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling in the case of Lear Automotive India Private Ltd had passed a ruling GST-ARA-19/2018-19/B-80 dated 31.07.2018 = 2018 (12) TMI

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

with M/s Lear Automotive India Pvt Ltd along with supporting documents.
DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
7. We have gone through the records of the case and taken into consideration the submissions made by the Appellant in writing and during the personal hearing and also the documents produced by them.
8. The short point for determination is whether the value of the components manufactured and supplied by the Appellant should include the cost of the tools which are supplied by the customer free of cost and used by the Appellant in the manufacture of the components.
9. Under the erstwhile Central Excise regime, Rule 6 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 required an assessee to calculate the intrinsic value of the excisable goods by including any additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee. In other words, since excise duty was levied on the activity of manufacture, any activity which was contributing to the manufacturing activity was inclu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ection 7 of the CGST Act which reads as under:
7. (1) For the purposes of this Act, the expression “supply” includes –
(a) all forms of supply of goods or services or both such as sale, transfer, barter, exchange, licence, rental, lease or disposal made or agreed to be made for a consideration by a person in the course or furtherance of business;
(b) import of services for a consideration whether or not in the course or furtherance of business;
(c) the activities specified in Schedule I, made or agreed to be made without a consideration; and
(d) the activities to be treated as supply of goods or supply of services as referred to in Schedule II.
In so far as the valuation of the supply is concerned, Section 15 of the CGST Act provides that the value of taxable supply shall be the transaction value which is the price paid or payable by the recipient provided the supplier and recipient are unrelated parties and price is the sole consideration for the supply. Further Section of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

a Commercial Vehicles Pvt Ltd (DICV).
12. We have gone through the terms (General and Special terms) of the contract entered into between the Appellant and DICV. As per para 16 of the General Terms and Conditions of DICV for the purchase of products and spare parts, which form an integral part of the Contract between DICV and the Appellant, the Appellant is obligated to comply with the requirements of DICV's Special Terms pertaining to tooling. Para 16.2 reads that “If and to the extent the agreed total cost for an item of tooling has been paid by Buyer in full, title to such tooling and any and all IPR created in the course of the development of such tooling for buyer will immediately be transferred to Buyer. Supplier is entitled to keep the tooling only as a temporary possession until the Purchase Order has been performed Supplier must hand over the tooling to Buyer following fulfillment of the Purchase Order if so requested by Buyer.”
13. The Daimler India Special Terms (DIST) ar

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

upplier is hereby authorized and required to use DICV Owned Tools within the framework of the supply Contract concluded with DICV concerning the parts to be manufactured with the tools.
The supplier shall use the tools only for the purpose of fulfilling its manufacturing obligations under the supply contract. Hence the supplier is prohibited front any deviating use of DICV Owned Tools in Particular the use of tools for production of parts to supply third parties or the transfer of usage to third parties or unauthorized handover of tools to third parties, without the prior written consent of DIC.V.
2.2 The supplier shall retain DICV Owned Tools at the location as originally agreed between the supplier and DICV
2.4 As a consideration for availing the tools from DICV free of charge, the supplier shall abide by the following terms of maintenance. The supplier must ensure constant defect-free functional capacity and readiness of the tools during their use within the framework of the s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, DICV may reimburse the supplier the of the tool costs which had not yet been amortised. Upon reimbursement of such Costs, DICV shall be deemed to have unlimited ownership of the tools.
14. On going through the above terms and conditions of the contract between the Appellant and DICV, it is evident that the Appellant is required to use DICV Owned Tools concerning the part to be manufactured with the tool. The tool shall be used only for the purpose of fulfilling its manufacturing obligations under the supply contract. The Tool is developed and manufactured by the Appellant under a specific Purchase Order. The applicable GST on the supply of the tool is levied in the invoice raised by the Appellant for the supply of the Tool. Once the agreed cost of the tool has been paid by DICV, the title of the tool and all IPR created in the course of the development of the Tool will be transferred to DICV. The Appellant is entitled to keep the tool in his premises only as a temporary possession

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e manufacture of parts for the customer. In the event of the second possibility, the customer, DICV takes ownership of the Non-DICV Owned Tools by way of a security only with the objective of ensuring that the supply of their parts by the Appellant is uninterrupted. In the event there is an interruption in delivery of manufactured components using the Non-DICV Owned Tools, then the customer, DICV, has the right to demand the surrender of the tools and reimburse the Appellant the percentage of the tool cost which has not been amortized. On perusal of the contract, it is understood that, in the case Non- DICV Owned Tools are used in the manufacture of the components, the price agreed upon includes the amortized cost of the Non-DICV Owned Tools.
15. CBIC in its Circular No 47/21/2018-GST dated 08.06.2018 has clarified that goods owned by OEM that are provided to a component manufacturer on FOC basis do not constitute a supply as there is no consideration and in such cases, the value of g

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. TECPRO INFRA PROJECTS LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BESL INFRA PROJECTS LTD) Versus STATE TAX OFFICER STATE GST DEPARTMENT OF KERALA, ALUVA, THE COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI
GST
2019 (3) TMI 488 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 1-3-2019
WP(C). No. 6385 of 2019
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The Petitioner : ADV. SRI. BEJOY CHERIYAN
For The Respondent : GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES
JUDGMENT
In this writ petition the petitioner has approached this Court with the following relie

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ax Act cannot be enforced after 15/09/2017 so long as the old Entry 54 has not been saved.
iv) To declare that when the provisions of Constitution are inconsistent with the provisions of a statute, the provisions of Constitution will prevail over the provisions of statute and so provisions of Sec.174 of the Kerala Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 to the extent to which they are in conflict with the provisions of Constitution, are bad in law.
v) To declare that as Sec.19 of the Constitution Amendment Act is having supremacy over the rest of Sections of Constitution Amendment Act, the provisions passed under Sec.174 invoking Article 246A of the Constitution of India is subservient to Sec.19 of the Constitution Amendment Act and so any pro

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund With Payment Of Tax In Case Of Deemed Exports
Query (Issue) Started By: – HIMANSHU GOEL Dated:- 28-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 2-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
As per Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017, a person cannot claim refund of IGST on export of services where such person has availed benefit of Deemed Export under NN 48/2017-CT dated 18th Oct, 2017. Whether this restriction is applicable for
(a) indefinite period,
(b) tax period for which refund of I

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commission received by the owner of petrol pump from petroleum company
Query (Issue) Started By: – khaja sayeed Dated:- 28-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 29-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 1 Reply
GST
Sir,
Commission paid by the petroleum company for the services provided by the owner of the retail outlet i.e. petrol pump is taxable under GST? If it is what is the GST tax rate? Kindly specify.
Reply By SHARAD ANADA:
The Reply:
Yes GST applicable @18%
Discussion Forum – Know

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

43rd Civil Accounts Day on March 1, 2019; On the occasion, the Finance Minister, Shri Arun Jaitley to make a Statement on the implementation of PM -KISAN Yojana through PFMS and to release the Compendium on GST Refunds compiled by the Office of Pr. CCA (CBIC) among others
News and Press Release
Dated:- 28-2-2019

The Indian Civil Accounts Service (ICAS) is celebrating March 1 every year as the “Civil Accounts Day”. Since its inception, the ICAS has steadily grown in stature and now plays an important role in the management of public finances of the Union Government. A function is being organized on March 1, 2019 at Mavalankar Auditorium, Constitution Club of India, Rafi Marg, New Delhi to mark the 43rd Civil Accounts Day.
The 43rd Civil Accounts Day will essentially show case the progress of the flagship project of the Indian Civil Accounts Organization viz the Public Financial Management System (PFMS). Apart from this, the role of PFMS in processing IGST refunds under th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

1 -Implementation of PM -KISAN Yojana through PFMS
2 -Processing of GST refunds through the ARPIT application integrated with PFMS
The Finance Minister, Shri Jaitley will subsequently make a Statement on the implementation of PM -KISAN Yojana and will release the Compendium on GST refunds compiled by the Office of Pr. CCA (CBIC).
PFMS will now also be implementing the Government ambitious PM -KISAN Yojana which would involve an estimated additional 12 -13 crore beneficiaries. This involves a massive exercise of coordination with multiple stakeholders including the Ministry of Agriculture and the Banks for achieving the objective. It is indeed a proud moment for the Indian Civil Accounts Organization that the First Tranche of ₹ 2000 was successfully credited to the Banks Accounts of the first lot of 1.01 crore beneficiaries on 24th February 2019 with the formal launch of the scheme by the Prime Minister.
The ICAS has been committed to the leveraging of IT for enhancing the e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

crore during this entire period out of which R 23.05 lakh crore (approximately 50%) were successfully processed during the calendar year 2018 alone.
• Bank Integration -PFMS today is integrated with a total of 249 banks under all categories. 67 of these banks were integrated during the calendar Year 2018 alone.
DBT transactions –
• PFMS has successfully processed in excess of 179 crore DBT transactions involving total DBT payments of R 3.94 lakh crore during this entire period. Almost 40% -45% of these transactions were successfully effected in the calendar year 2018 alone. Currently the total number of DBT beneficiaries being serviced by PFMS is in excess of 18 crores.
• Agencies registered for DBT -As on date 25.36 lakh agencies are registered with PFMS for DBT payments.
The highlights of the 43rd Civil Accounts Day function shall be the following:
i. On the occasion of the 43rd Civil Accounts Day, the Finance Minister shall be briefed by the Controller Genera

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e from PFMS (Public Financial management System) up to the previous day. The Dashboard also incorporates data from the treasury systems of the 29 States and 2 UTs with legislature, i.e. releases made by the Government of India to the State Governments under the various Centrally Sponsored Schemes. The data for Non-Tax Receipts (through www.bharatkosh.gov.in) is also available for monitoring.
The Dashboard also has a unique feature of monitoring Bank Balance of all the Agencies involved in the implementation of schemes of Government of India. This is envisaged to reduce idle/parked/unutilised funds with the Agencies and to facilitate just-in-time releases, thereby reducing the cost to the Government of India.
The Bank Monitoring Mobile Application is a facility for Bank Performance Monitoring developed to keep track of various Key Performance Indicators for the over 250 Banks integrated with PFMS's Account Validation and Payment system. Indicators like time taken to credit funds into

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of CGST, IGST, Compensation Cess and UTGST-others. This is a multi-user Portal and provides Dashboard facility and various MIS, Accounting and other Reports. ARPIT owing to its design and system capabilities can also be adopted by all the 29 states and 7 UTs for accounting of State GST/UTGST.
• GRameen Internal Audit Portal (GRIP)- GRameen Internal Audit Portal is an end to end software solution for document management of Risk Based Internal Audit and process related to analysis of the findings. This portal has been developed and piloted in Ministry of Rural Development where Risk Based Internal Audit of MGNREGA and PMAY schemes are done through this portal. Under MGNREGA, more than ₹ 60,000 crore and more than 19,000 crore under PMAY has been allocated during current financial year. Office of CGA is responsible for conducting Internal Audit of the expenses incurred out of the funds released by Government of India. Hence efforts are made to make Internal Audit automated a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Accurate Bag Classification Under GST: Refer to General Rules When Fabric Material is Unspecified in Customs Tariff.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification of goods – Bags/Sacks – in the absence of any

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =