Author: admin_gst

2018 (12) TMI 225 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI – Issue of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest and harass the petitioner pursuant to the First Information Report – offence under CGST Act – Held that:- The petitioner to appear in the office of respondent no. 4 on 04.12.2018, and thereafter as and when required by the inquiry officer.
–
The Investigating officer shall furnish a questionnaire to the petitioner – The petitioner would be obliged to answer the questionnaire and furnish the answers available with her.
–
List on 13.02.2019. – Misc. Bench No. – 34273 of 2018 Dated:- 29-11-2018 – Ajai Lamba And Karunesh Singh Pawar JJ. For the Petitioner : Amit Jaiswal,G.S.Pandey For the Respondent : A.S.G. ORDER 1. The petitio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

sted by Shri Amit Jaiswal, has argued that the petitioner, along with her husband namely Sunil Kumar Gupta is a partner in two firms. A raid was conducted on 30.10.2018 on the business premises, Sunil Kumar Gupta, Rachin Gupta, and one Jaideep Kumar Agarwal were taken by the raiding party and their arrest was shown on 01.11.2018. 4. It has been pleaded that the arrest itself is illegal and against the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 5. It has been pleaded that the petitioner is sought to be arrested. The offence is under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It has been argued that Section 138 of the said Act of 2017 provides for compounding of offences also. It has been argued that till date complaint has not b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

a questionnaire to the petitioner. The questionnaire be also furnished to the petitioner at her e-mail address so that subsequently, it is not disputed whether questionnaire was given or not and whether the petitioner responded or not. 10. The petitioner would be obliged to answer the questionnaire and furnish the answers available with her. 11. List on 13.02.2019. 12. Let para wise counter affidavits be filed. 13. The petitioner shall not be taken in custody, till the next date of listing. The petitioner is directed to join investigation. 14. We further direct that petitioner would be required to appear only from 10.a.m. to 4 p.m. on working days. This direction is being issued considering the fact that the petitioner is a lady. – Case

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – 66/2018-State Tax – Dated:- 29-11-2018 – COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, MAHARASHTRA STATE GST Bhavan, Mazgaon, Mumbai 400 010, dated the 29th November 2018. NOTIFICATION Notification No. 66/2018-State Tax MAHARASHTRA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017. No. JC (HQ)-1/GST/2018/Noti./Returns/ADM-8.-In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (6) of section 39 read with section 168 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Mah. XLIII of 2017) (hereinafter referred to as t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 1241 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI – Restoration of appeal – praying for restoration of appeal was made with a delay of about 5 years – non compliance with the condition of pre-deposit – Held that:- If the legal position wipes out substantial liability or entire liability, as, according to the appellant, construction of residential complex by a builder was subjected to service tax only from 01.7.2010, this vital point has to be considered by the Tribunal and if this plea is acceptable, it goes without saying that the appellant made out a strong prima facie case. Hence, we are constrained to interfere with the impugned order, however, subject to a condition.
–
The appellant had already pre-deposited ₹ 7 lakhs. If the appellant complies with this condition within the time stipulated by us in this judgment, then the two miscellaneous applications shall stand automatically restored to the file of the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall take a fresh decision in both the app

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

that the original order of the Tribunal was not served on the appellant, but served on 22.3.2018 when requested by the appellant through RTI application ? and ii. Whether the Tribunal is justified in rejecting the restoration application filed by the appellant on mere assumption without going into the merits of the claim that the demand is contrary to the instructions of the Board dated 17.9.2004? CMA.No.2735 of 2018 : i. Whether the Tribunal is justified in dismissing the appeal for non compliance of stay order without going into the merits of the case, which, according to the appellant, is covered by decision of the Delhi High Court reported in (2016) 43 STR 3 and the instructions of the Board's Circular No.108/02/2009-ST dated 29.1.2009 ? and ii. Whether dismissal of appeal for non compliance of stay order takes away the statutory right of appeal provided under the Act ? 3. The challenge is to the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafte

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nal dated 30.4.2010, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. Along with the appeal, the appellant filed a miscellaneous application for stay. The Tribunal, by order dated 15.1.2013, found that the appellant made out a prima facie case, as they placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of LCS City Makers Private Limited Vs. CCE [reported in (2012-TIOL-618- CESTAT-Mad.] and directed the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 50% of the service tax demanded within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order dated 15.1.2013. The matter was directed to be listed on 04.3.2013 for reporting compliance. 6. Admittedly, the appellant did not comply with the condition within the time stipulated, but deposited only a sum of ₹ 7 lakhs in bits and pieces as against the condition of pre-deposit of ₹ 28.90 lakhs. The appellant also filed an application for extension of time, which was considered by the Tribunal and by order dated

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

esidential complex by a builder was subjected to service tax only from 01.7.2010 by way of the Explanation brought into Section 65(105)(zzzh) of the Finance Act and if this provision is applied, 90% of the demand made in the Order-in-Original dated 30.4.2010 would not survive. 9. The Tribunal heard both the miscellaneous applications and dismissed the application for restoration by order dated 16.7.2018, which is impugned before us in one of the appeals without rendering any finding in the modification application. 10. We have heard Mr.K.Jayachandran, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.Syed Noorullah Sheriff, learned Senior Standing Counsel accepting notice for the Revenue. 11. Considering the fact that though the Tribunal noticed that the appellant filed two miscellaneous applications, one of them is with a prayer to modify the stay order passed by the Tribunal dated 15.1.2013 directing predeposit of ₹ 28.90 lakhs and another for restoration of the appeal, the Tribunal, in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – 27/2018–C.T./GST-66/2018 – State Tax – Dated:- 29-11-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL DIRECTORATE OF COMMERCIAL TAXES 14, BELIAGHATA ROAD, KOLKATA -700015 NOTIFICATION BY THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX Notification No. 27/2018-C.T./GST Dated: 29/11/2018 Notification No. 66/2018 – State Tax In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (6) of section 39 read with section 168 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (West Ben. Act XXVIII of 2017) (hereinafter referre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2019 (2) TMI 204 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Levy of penalty – delay in payment of cess – Penalty u/r 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 – suppression of facts or not? – Tea Cess for the period Jun.'13 to Dec.'13 – Held that:- No evidence is established that the appellants have suppressed facts in order to evade payment of Cess. On being pointed out, they had paid the Cess. It is argued by learned counsel, that the delay occurred due to financial hardships, the instalments due to the banks, payment of wages etc., There was no intention to evade payment of Cess.
–
The penalty imposed is harsh and unwarranted is set aside – appeal allowed in part. – E/41736/2018 – FINAL ORDER NO. 42981/2018 –

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

el Ms. P. Kanthi Visalakshi appeared and argued the matter. She submitted that the appellants are confining the arguments to the imposition of penalties only. They have paid the Cess demand. She argued that though in the show-cause notice it is proposed to impose penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944, there is no allegation raised that the appellants had suppressed facts with intention to evade payment of duty. Even in the order, the adjudicating authority has not stated any reasons for imposing penalty except for the fact it is stated that the appellants have violated the provisions of law and have filed returns belatedly. It is also argued by her that the appellants were fac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

riod Jun.'13 to Dec.'13. On perusal of the show-cause notice, I do not find any ground alleged so as to impose the penalty under the said provisions. No evidence is established that the appellants have suppressed facts in order to evade payment of Cess. On being pointed out, they had paid the Cess. It is argued by learned counsel, that the delay occurred due to financial hardships, the instalments due to the banks, payment of wages etc., There was no intention to evade payment of Cess. Taking these facts into consideration, I am of the view that the penalty imposed is harsh and unwarranted. The penalties under Rule 25 and Rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 are hereby set aside. The impugned order is modified to the limited extent

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – CT/LEG-NT/12/17/1190 – Dated:- 29-11-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES NAGALAND: DIMAPUR Dated Dimapur, the 29th November, 2018 NOTIFICATION- 24/2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (6) of section 39 read with section 168 of the Nagaland Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (4 of 2017) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Commissioner hereby extends the time limit for furnishing the return by a registered person requi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – CT/LEG-NT/12/1189 – Dated:- 29-11-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES NAGALAND: DIMAPUR Dated Dimapur, the 29th November, 2018 NOTIFICATION- 23/2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by section 168 of the Nagaland Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (4 of 2017) read with sub-rule (5) of rule 61 of the Nagaland Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereafter in this notification referred to as the said rules), the Commissioner, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby makes the following further amendments in notification number 12/2018 dated the 10th August, 2018, namely :- In the said notification, in the first paragraph, after the fourth proviso, the following provisos shall be inserte

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 28-11-2018 – In view of the disturbances caused to daily life by Cyclone Titli in the district of Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, and by Cyclone Gaza in eleven districts of Tamil Nadu viz., Cuddalore, Thiruvarur, Puddukottai, Dindigul, Nagapatinam, Theni, Thanjavur, Sivagangai, Tiruchirappalli, Karur and Ramanathapuram, the competent authority has decided to extend the due dates for filing various GST returns as detailed below: Sl. No. Return/Form Extended due date Taxpayers eligible for extension 1 FORM GSTR-3B for the months of September and October, 2018 30th November, 2018 Taxpayers whose principal place of business is in the district of Srikakulam in Andhra Pradesh 2 FORM GSTR-3B for the month of Oct

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – Guidelines for Deductions and Deposits of TDS by the DDO under Meghalaya Goods and Services Tax (MGST) Act, 2017. – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

MONTAGE ADVERTISING PVT.LTD. – Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – SURESH KATYAL – Dated:- 28-11-2018 Last Replied Date:- 28-11-2018 – Thanks Sir,for replying on my query.suresh – Reply By DR.MARIA

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – manoj agrawal – Dated:- 28-11-2018 Last Replied Date:- 1-12-2018 – Govt fees paid on agri commodity like regulated market commitee fee which is like 1 % of value of agri commodity . such agri marketing commitee are under state Govt . it is inward supply . where to show such inward supply in GSTR 3B As this is realting to payment made to state Govt . – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Column 2 of GSTR 3B is meant for taxable. The value on which tax is to be paid. In my view, in the situation explained by you, it is neither supply of goods nor supply of service. It is a statutory function and hence out of purview of GST. This is my view. – Reply By PAWAN KUMAR – The Reply = Dear Sir, As per my view,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

empted vide entry no. 6 (onwards) of Notification number 12/2017 except (d) – any service provided to business entity.. As such the govt fees paid on agri commodity is taxable. . As per entry number 5 of notification number 13/2017 the services to business entities by government are subject to RCM under section 9(3) – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Dear Sir, Interesting discussion. The crucial point is Whether Fee charged is on account of Supply Of Service ? Does the activity conform to the definition of 'Service' ? Whether Fee can be termed as consideration ? There is a world of difference between Fee and Consideration . Activity must qualify Service and Consideration before talking of leviability of GST. Where is service ? W

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

charges 'Fee' of 1% on the value of sale or purchase agricultural produce and who has received service and who has provided service. – Reply By manoj agrawal – The Reply = Good Morning Pawan Sir View regarding this is Nil rated I agree to it . As Regulated Market committee is a committee or Board created by state Govt for regulation of buy and sale of agri produce so it falls perfectly Under Entry nno 57 Services by any Agricultural prodice Marketing commitee or Board or services by A commisiion agent for sale or purchase of agricultural produce . – Reply By PAWAN KUMAR – The Reply = Agreed sir. It is under exemption as services provided by agriculture marketing committee is exempt. Fee paid and gst on it not payable under RCM – Dis

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – SURESH KATYAL – Dated:- 28-11-2018 Last Replied Date:- 28-11-2018 – SIR, I have LOST ARN of LUT for 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018. Can I get new number or duplicate no. Please guide suresh – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = You can trace out in your email account. You may have got message on your mobile. You may not need new number. It must be available in Common Portal. Seek help of help desk/Grievance Redressal Cell. – Reply By PAWAN KUMAR – The Reply = N

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – kudaravalli srinivas – Dated:- 28-11-2018 Last Replied Date:- 28-11-2018 – Dear SirPlease clarify regarding Incentives given by Publication ti news paper agency and what is the rate of GST to be chargeable and what is rate of TDS to be deduct – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Pl.elaborate your query. I think you are getting commission. Pl.confirm – Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN – The Reply = Sri Sethi's contention is correct. It is commission

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Shyam Agarwal – Dated:- 28-11-2018 Last Replied Date:- 29-11-2018 – Sir, In case of Mixed supply of Goods and Services then tax rate shall be apply the highest rate among both of them. But how Place of supply shall be determined in such case. If there is combination of goods and service both in Mixed supply then Place of supply will be determined either as per Place of supply for Goods u/s 10 of IGST act or Place of supply for services u/s 12 of IGST Act? Please suggest. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Dear Querist, This Board's circular will help you to arrive at appropriate decision:- Meaning and scope of supply – Reply By Shyam Agarwal – The Reply = Sir, Thanks for your reply but GST law

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

parlance for example supply of Washing powder with Bucket where single price for both the goods is charged then it will be treated as a Mixed supply and GST on entire price shall be charged at higher rate among the washing powder or Bucket. – Reply By CASusheel Gupta – The Reply = As per section 8(b): a mixed supply comprising two or more supplies shall be treated as a supply of that particular supply which attracts the highest rate of tax For the purpose of ascertaining tax rate, supply is deemed to be of supply which attracts highest rate of tax. For POS, we need to identify our supply either as goods or services and should not be confused with taxability under section 8. Request u to post the nature of supply for which this question is b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Levy of GST – premimum for leasing out of the plot allotted to the petitioner for the purposes of hospital, nursing home, diagnostic centeres etc. – Demand raised despite the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – By: – AttnVivek Jalan – Dated:- 28-11-2018 – It is seen in many states that GST Officials are visiting clients premises by invoking Sec 67(1) of The CGST Act 2017 on Inspection. Many of these are Multinational Companies located in various countries of the globe and doing business in India from the past many years and are registered in multi states in India. In the state where such inspections are happening itself they are doing business since last many many years. Lets discuss on how to handle such Inspections by the Government officials through a 6 Step Process – Please check the GST-INS 01 with the notified form and whether the tick boxes to declare exceptional circumstances for reasons to believe are there

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

reby provide a draft of submission of Objections and Protest against the arbitrary action of Inspection at the assesses place – First state that you responsible and law abiding Corporate citizens, using reliable ERP Systems and having transparent Accounting and Taxation practices. State also about the various states and countries in which you are doing business. Object and protest against such arbitrary Investigation carried out without any prior notice at the premises. State that Sec 67(1) read with Rule 139(1) and CBIC s Flyer make it abundantly clear that Inspection can be carried out only after fulfilling the following conditions – 1. Inspection can be carried out only in exceptional circumstances of suppression, evasion, contravention

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

le event of suppression, evasion, contravention or manipulation which was unearthed during such investigation. Such inspection was not carried out as a Last resort . Invoking of Inspection as the Last Resort implies that the assessee has failed the tests of inquiry and thus as a last resort investigation is resorted to. There was no reason to believe any act of suppression, evasion, contravention or manipulation – In Income Tax Officer v. Lakhmani Mewaldas 1976 (3) TMI 1 – SUPREME COURT , the Supreme Court held that there should be a live link or close nexus, between the material before the ITO and the formation of his belief that income had escaped assessment. The assese s rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19 and 301 of The Constitution

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 102 – JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT – TMI – Admitting the notice for hearing – Held that:- Issue notice to the respondents for 20.02.2019 to show cause as to why the appeal be not admitted to hearing.
–
It is directed that, subject to appellant releasing 50% of the amount due in terms of impugned judgment dated 23rd March, 2018 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal to the respondent entrepreneur on furnishing solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within four weeks of furnishing of such surety, payment of balance shall remain stayed. – MCC No. 322/2018 c/w CEA No. 66/2018, IA No. 01/2018 Dated:- 28-11-2018 – Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal, Judge And Mr. Justice Tashi Rabs

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 135 – NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY – TMI – Penalty – Profiteering – benefit of reduction in the price granted – Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017 – Held that:- The Respondent has deliberately acted in defiance of the above law and hence he is guilty of the conduct which is contumacious and dishonest. He has further acted in conscious disregard of the obligation which was cast upon him by the law, by issuing incorrect invoice in which the base price was deliberately not reduced by the amount of CVD, SAD and CST chargeable under erstwhile scenario which is now chargeable as IGST in the GST regime and is available as ITC benefit and thus he had denied the benefit of reduction in the price granted vide IGST provisions to his customers. Accordingly he has committed an offence under Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017.
–
The notice regarding imposition of penalty has already been issued to the Respondent on 11.09.2018. However, the Respondent has not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

dent in this regard. – Case No. 15/2018 Dated:- 28-11-2018 – Sh. B. N. Sharma, Chairman, Sh. J. C. Chauhan, Technical Member And Ms. R. Bhagyadevi, Technical Member Dr. Archana Singh and Sh. Vijay Pandey, Associate for the Applicant No. 1, Sh. Anwar Ali T. P., Additional Commissioner for the Applicant No. 2. Sh. George Abraham and Sh. Amish Jain, Directors for the Respondent. ORDER 1. This investigation Report dated 30.08.2018 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. Director General of Anti-Profiteering (here-in- after referred to as the DGAP) on 31.08.2018 under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The facts of the present case, in brief, are that the Standing Committee on Anti- profiteering had recommended an investigation on an application dated 06.02.2018 (Annexure-2) filed by the Applicant No. 1 relating to the purchase of (i) Lava CNC 240 Milling Machine with accessories and (ii) Lava Materials Approved Sintering Furnace D664 (here-in-

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

merged in the IGST and hence he had been denied the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) by the Respondent and therefore, action should be taken against him. 2. The said Application was examined by the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering and was referred to the DGAP vide it's minutes of the meeting dated 25.05.2018 for detailed investigation under Rule 129 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017. 3. The DGAP had called upon the Respondent vide his notice dated 18.06.2018 to submit his reply on the allegations leveled by the Applicant No. 1 and also to suo-moto determine the quantum of benefit which had not been passed by the Respondent on account of the ITC. The Respondent was also asked to furnish documents and evidence in support of his reply. The DGAP has informed that the Respondent in his replies dated 29.06.2018 (Anexure-10) and 17.07.2018 (Annexure-11) had denied the allegations leveled by the Applicant No. 1 The DGAP has also informed that the Respondent had also submitted the details

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ad further claimed that the invoices were issued after the implementation of the GST and he proposed to cover the extra cost to be paid by the above Applicant due to IGST through the additional supply of Lava Frames to him. The DGAP has further stated that the Respondent has intimated that he had imported and sold both the items after the GST was implemented and he had not claimed any transitional benefit on them. 4. The DGAP has also submitted that the Respondent had informed there had been an increase in the taxable value of 240CNC Milling Machine w.e.f. January, 2017, as was apparent from the invoice (Annex- 14) of Poona Dental Lab who had bought the same on 27.01.2017, however, no invoice was available for the Sintering Furnace D664 as it was supplied for the first time by the Respondent. The DGAP has further submitted that the Respondent had maintained that the above Applicant had agreed to the terms of the sale. The DGAP has also intimated that the Respondent had claimed that his

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

given a quotation on 28.11.2016 for a total amount of ₹ 59,06,000/- plus 2% Freight and 2% CST against C-Form, for both the items to the above Applicant which showed that the total amount which was to be paid by the above Applicant, was as under:- Description Price (in Rs.) Lava Mill CNC 240 and accessories (A) 44,66,000/- Lava Materials approved Sintering Furnace D664 (B) 14,40,000/- Total price (C=A+B) 59,06,000/- Freight (D= 2% of 'C' above) 1,18,120/- Price (including Freight = C+D) 60,24,120 Plus CST (2%) 6. The DGAP has also intimated that as against the above quoted price the invoice for the above items was issued on 06.09.2017, as under:- Description Price (in Rs.) Lava Mill CNC 240 and accessories (A) 45,55,320/- Lava Materials approved Sintering Furnace D664 (B) 14,68,800/- Total price (C=A+B) 60,24,120/- IGST (18%) 10,84,342/- Price (including Tax) 71,08,462/- 7. The DGAP has also stated that had the import of the above items been made prior to the implementat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ice of the above items had remained the same, i.e., ₹ 60,24,120/- as per the quotation dated 28.11.2016 and the base price was not reduced to the extent of CVD that was not to be paid after the implementation of the GST. 8. The DGAP has also provided a detailed comparison of the taxes and duties which were payable before and after the implementation of GST and stated after the perusal of the Bill of Entry No. 3050858 dated 31.08.2018, it was apparent that the taxable value of the product "Lava CNC 240 Milling Machine" on which CVD @ 12.5% would have been required to be paid was ₹ 22,15,844/- and for the Bill of Entry No. 2990028 dated 25.08.2018, the taxable value of the product "Sintering Furnace D664" on which CVD @ 12.5% was required to be paid would have been ₹ 10,25,411/- and hence, the Respondent would have been liable to pay CVD at 12.5% amounting to ₹ 2,76,980/- for the item "Lava CNC 240 Milling Machine" and Rs. for the ite

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

been ₹ 66,30,377/- instead of ₹ 71,08,462/- and hence the total amount of profiteering done by the Respondent in the case of supplies made to the Applicant No. 1 was ₹ 4,78,085/-. 9. The above report was considered by the Authority in its meeting held on 12.09.2018 and it was decided to hear the Applicant No. 1 and the Respondent on 26.09.2018. 10. The hearing was held on 26.09.2018, wherein the Applicant No. I was represented by Dr. Archana Singh and Sh. Vijay Pandey; Applicant No. 2 was represented by Sh. Anwar Ali T.P., Additional Commissioner and on behalf of the Respondent Sh. George Abraham and Sh. Amish Jain, Directors appeared. The Applicant No. 1 stated that he had purchased the above two items from the Respondent based on the quotation dated 28.11.2016 having taxable value of ₹ 60,24,120/-, however, after much delay the products were received with the tax invoice amounting to ₹ 71,08,462/- on 06.09.2017. The Applicant No. 1 contended that since

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

was based in Ranchi and any sale prior to the GST attracted CST @ 2 %, which amounted to an additional Cost, for which no credit was available as per the provisions of the CST Act, 1956. The Respondent has also contended that the DGAP had failed to consider the 2 % CST component of ₹ 1,20,482/- while working out the amount of profiteering The Respondent has also contended that he had not indulged in Profiteering and the amount of ₹ 4,78,085/- inclusive of GST @ 18% amounting to ₹ 79,928/- calculated by the DGAP was incorrect. 13. We have carefully considered the material placed before us as well as the submissions made by the Respondent and find that the Respondent has vehemently argued that he had supplied additional material to the above Applicant costing about ₹ 13 Lakhs and borne an amount of ₹ 6 Lakhs out of the above amount which had not been taken in to consideration by the DGAP. In this connection it is revealed that there is no mention of the Comb

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

had increased in the month of January, 2017 which was communicated to the above Applicant and he had agreed that the Machine may be supplied to him on the increased price. However, there is no evidence on record to prove the above claim of the Respondent. Neither he had submitted fresh quotation to the above Applicant nor he had sent any communication to him in this regard and hence the above claim is not tenable. 14. We have also found that the Respondent has wrongly charged higher price from the Applicant No. 1 as he should have reduced the base price to the extent of CVD (at 12.5%) which was chargeable on the amount mentioned in the quotation dated 28.11.2016 since in the period prior to GST no CENVAT credit was available for the CVD paid on the import of the goods whereas in the post GST period no CVD was charged instead IGST was charged on the import of goods which was available as ITC to the Respondent while supplying goods to the above Applicant. Hence the price offered prior to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e quantum of profiteering in the subject supplies:- Table-A Pre-GST import scenario Post-GST (As charged) CNC 240 Milling Machine (in Rs.) D664 Sintering Furnace (in Rs.) Total CNC 240 Milling Machine (in Rs.) D664 Sintering Furnace (in Rs.) Total Taxable value at the time of import (A) 22,15844 10,25,411 32,41,255 CVD @ 12.5% of taxable value at the time of import (B) 2,76,980 1,28,176 4,05,156 Base Price Charged By The Respondent (C) 45,55,320 14,68,800 60,34,120 Base Price 45,55,320 14,68,800 60,24,120 CST Charged (2% of C) 91,106 29,376 1,20,482 IGST Charged (18%) 8,19,958 2,64,384 1084342 Total price to be charged 46,46,426 14,98,176 61,44,602 Total price actually charged 53,75,278 17,33,184 71,08,462 Table-B Pre-GST (What should have been) Post-GST (What should have been) CNC 240 Milling Machine (in Rs.) D664 Sintering Furnace (in Rs.) Total CNC 240 Milling Machine (in Rs.) D664 Sintering Furnace (in Rs.) Total Taxable value at the time of import (A) 22,15844 10,25,411 32,41,255

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

doubt in our minds that the Respondent has profiteered at the expense of the Applicant No. 1 in respect of the subject supplies made by him and has thus violated the provisions of Section 171 of the Act ibid and has therefore rendered himself liable to penal action in line with the provisions of Section 122 of the CGST Act, 2017 apart from his liability to refund the above profiteered amount along with the applicable interest in terms of the provisions of the CGST Rules. 2017. 17. Accordingly, the Respondent is directed to reduce the sale price of the above items immediately commensurate to the reduction in the price due to ITC of erstwhile chargeable CVD which is now available in the form of IGST and pass on this benefit to his customers. He is also directed to refund an amount of ₹ 4,78,085/- along with interest @ 18% to the Applicant No. 1 from the date when this amount was realised by him till the date of refund. The above amount shall be refunded within a period of 3 months

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

orrect invoice in which the base price was deliberately not reduced by the amount of CVD, SAD and CST chargeable under erstwhile scenario which is now chargeable as IGST in the GST regime and is available as ITC benefit and thus he had denied the benefit of reduction in the price granted vide IGST provisions to his customers. Accordingly he has committed an offence under Section 122 (1) (i) of the CGST Act, 2017. 19. It is also revealed from the record that the notice regarding imposition of penalty has already been issued to the Respondent on 11.09.2018. However, the Respondent has not furnished any reply or advanced any arguments on the quantum of penalty to be imposed on him. Keeping in view the principles of natural justice, opportunity of being heard has to be given to the Respondent before the penalty is imposed. Hence fresh notice be given to him to explain why penalty should not be imposed on him. 20. Further, as elaborated above, it is clear that the Respondent did not pass on

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 242 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI – Refund claim – provisional assessment – unjust enrichment – applicability of precedent decisions – Held that:- The adjudicating authority has ventured into the merits of the matter, to hold that the refund claim is hit by unjust enrichment, without considering the fact that the Tribunal’s order is binding on him unless set aside by higher judicial forum.
–
Since the refund claim filed by the respondent in this case has arisen out of the consequential relief granted by the Tribunal by order dated 04.05.2016, and that the said order holding the field are not set aside, and that appeals were filed were withdrawn would mean that the Tribunal’s order holds good and the adjudicating authority is required to follow the judicial discipline and should sanction the refund claim to the respondent and not to credit to consumer welfare fund.
–
Appeal dismissed – decided against Revenue. – Appeal No. E/30566/2018 – A/31491/2018 – Dated:- 28-11-2

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

(arrived at after finalisation of assessments) and accordingly allowed the appeal, with consequential relief. On obtaining such order, the respondent filed an application for the refund of the amounts involved on 14.07.2016. The adjudicating authority in the case in hand, by his adjudication order went into the merits of the case and held that respondent is not eligible for the refund of the amounts as the issue is covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CCE, Madras Vs Adison & Company Ltd [2016 (339) ELT 177 (SC)]. Aggrieved by such an order, an appeal was preferred before the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority after following due process of law, in the impugned order held that the respondent is eligible for the refund of the amounts as these refunds are arising as consequential relief, on a decision by Tribunal holding in respondent s favour on merits. He also went into the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Adison & Company Ltd

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ate of Andhra Pradesh in the case of CCE, Visakhapatnam-II Vs Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills [2018 (361) ELT 409] has held that Apex Court s judgment in the case of Adison & Co. Ltd (supra) is applicable and the burden of the duty if passed on to the final consumer, the doctrine of unjust enrichment applies, he also brings to my knowledge the judgment of this Bench in the case of CCE & ST, Hyderabad-II Vs Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd [2018 (360) ELT 544] and submits that Bench has taken the same view. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent brings to my notice that the first appellate authority in Para 7 of the impugned order has categorically recorded that the adjudicating authority has not considered the fact that the refunds have arisen as a consequential relief by the order passed by the Tribunal on 04.05.2016. It is his submission that after recording clearly and holding on this ground that appeal needs to be allowed, the first appellate authority further went into the detai

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of the respondent herein and the Bench has categorically recorded that the appeals are allowed with consequential relief. In pursuance of such an order, respondent herein filed a refund claim for the amount. The adjudicating authority, in my view, has ventured into the merits of the matter, to hold that the refund claim is hit by unjust enrichment, without considering the fact that the Tribunal s order is binding on him unless set aside by higher judicial forum. In my view, the first appellate authority in Para 7 has correctly held so, which requires reproduction. 7. It is clear from Para 3 of the impugned order that the refund arises from a favourable order passed by the Tribunal, which has been challenged by the department before the High Court, who admittedly did not stay the operation of the Tribunal ruling. I have perused the Tribunal ruling leading to the refund, wherein the Tribunal examined the identical dispute where refund was denied on the ground of unjust enrichment; and u

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 347 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI – Release of seized goods and vehicle – Section 129 (1) of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 – Held that:- Since the petitioner is the owner of the goods as he had paid the entire amount of the value of the goods to the selling dealer, we direct that on petitioner's furnishing security in the form of Bank guarantee of the amount equivalent to that mentioned under clause (a) of Subsection (1) of Section 129 of the Act, the seized goods and the vehicle shall be released forthwith. – Writ Tax No. – 1483 of 2018 Dated:- 28-11-2018 – Pankaj Mithal And Pankaj Bhatia JJ. For the Petitioner : Naveen Chandra Gupta,Murari Mohan Rai For the Respondent : A.S.G.I.,C.S.C. ORDER Heard Sri N.C. Gupta,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 477 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, KARNATAKA – TMI – Permission to withdraw Advance Ruling Application – classification of goods – Scientific & Technical Instruments, Equipments – the Applicant requested to permit them to withdraw the application filed for advance ruling vide their e-mail letter dated 22.11.2018, quoting the reason that their claim has no merit – Held that:- The application filed by the Applicant for advance ruling is dismissed as withdrawn. – AAR No. KAR ADRG 31/2018 Dated:- 28-11-2018 – SRI. HARISH DHARNIA, AND DR. RAVI PRASAD M.P. MEMBER Represented by Sri. Praveen Crasta, Director ORDER UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 98 OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX ACT, 2017 AND UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 9

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Shock Chamber; Corrosion Test Chamber, Altitude Chamber, Dust Chamber, Rain Chamber, Walk in and drive in Chamber, that simulate real environmental conditions within a closed test space. The Applicant stated that these chambers are supplied to R&D and quality control labs to test the reliability of a product, these equipments used by DRDO s and other Defence Establishments, Automotive, Electrical & Electronic Industries (Private & Public Enterprises) and hence the use of these products is scientific & Technical in nature. 3. In view of the above, the Applicant has sought for Advance Ruling on the question that Can our product be classified as Scientific & Technical Instruments, Equipments under a relevant Chapter Heading

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 534 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, KARNATAKA – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 184 (A. A. R. – GST) – Levy of GST – value of building constructed and handed over to the land owner in terms of the Joint Development Agreement – value of GST to be paid since there is no monetary consideration involved – Liability of service tax up to 30.06.2017.
–
Held that:- In the instant case the applicant, a registered person, is supplying the construction service of building / civil structure to supplier of the development rights (the land owner) against consideration in the form of transfer of development rights. N/N. 4/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018, at para (b), stipulates that the supplier of construction service, to the supplier of development rights, is liable to pay GST for the service provided to the land owner in terms of the Joint Development Agreement – The applicant needs to pay tax towards the construction service provided to the land owner, on the value to be determ

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ded before / after 30.06.2017 respectively. – AAR No. KAR ADRG 30/2018 Dated:- 28-11-2018 – SRI. HARISH DHARNIA, AND DR. RAVI PRASAD M.P. MEMBER Represented by Sri. Rudolph M C Rodrigues, Chartered Accountant ORDER UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 98 OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX ACT, 2017 AND UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 98 OF KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 M/s. Nforce Infrastructure India Pvt. Ltd., Victoria, Near Valencia Church, Kankanady, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore – 575 002, Karnataka (herein after referred to as Applicant) having GSTIN number 29AADCN3089J1Z0, have filed an application, on 17.03.2018, for advance ruling under Section 97 of CGST Act,2017, KGST Act, 2017 & IGST Act, 2017 read with rule 104 of CGST Rules 2017 & KGST Rules 2017, in form GST ARA-01, discharging the fee of ₹ 10.000/- (CGST – ₹ 5,000/- & SGST – ₹ 5,000/-), vide challan bearing CIN number ICICI 18022900287680 dated 21.02.2018. 2. The Applicant, M/s. Enfo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

is instant application seeking advance ruling on the following issues 1. Whether the applicant is liable to pay GST on the value of building constructed and handed over to the land owner in terms of the Joint Development Agreement ? 2. If there is liability to pay GST on what value is the GST to be paid since there is no monetary consideration involved? 3. Is the applicant liable to pay service tax up to 30.06.2017 and GST thereafter? PERSONAL HEARING: / PROCEEDINGS HELD ON 03.04.2018. 4. The Applicant submitted power of attorney, issued by Sri, Ivan Mark Sequeira, Managing Director, M/S Nforce Infrastructure India Pvt. Ltd., authorizing Sri. Rudolpoh M C Rodrigues, Chartered Accountant to represent the applicant before the Authority for Advance Ruling in connection with the instant application for Advance Ruling. The said authorized representative appeared for personal hearing proceedings and submitted that the Joint Development Agreement had been entered into in January 2016, for con

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y to pay GST on what value is the GST to be paid since there is no monetary consideration involved? 3. Is the applicant liable to pay service tax up to 30.06.2017 and GST thereafter? 7. Notification No.4/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018, notifies the following classes of registered persons, namely a) Registered persons who supply development rights to a developers builder, construction company or any other registered person against consideration, wholly or partly, in the form of construction service of complex, building or civil structure; and b) Registered persons who supply construction service of complex, building or civil structure to supplier of development rights against consideration, wholly or partly, in the form of transfer of development rights, as the registered persons in whose case the liability to pay central tax on supply of the said services, on the consideration received in the form of construction service referred to in clause (a) above and in the form of deve

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rescribed; Section 22 of the CGST Act 2017 tells about the persons liable for registration and stipulates that Every supplier, who makes a taxable supply of goods or services or both, shall be liable to be registered, if his aggregate turnover crosses the threshold limit prescribed in the Act. 9. In the instant case the applicant, a registered person, is supplying the construction service of building / civil structure to supplier of the development rights (the land owner) against consideration in the form of transfer of development rights. Notification No.4/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018, at para (b), stipulates that the supplier of construction service, to the supplier of development rights, is liable to pay GST for the service provided to the land owner in terms of the Joint Development Agreement. 10. The applicant needs to pay tax towards the construction service provided to the land owner, on the value to be determined in terms of para 2 of the Notification No.11/2017-Cen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ion 142 (11) of the CGST/ KGST Act 2017, which is appended below : (11) (a) notwithstanding anything contained in section 12 no tax shall be payable on goods under this Act to the extent the tax was leviable on the said goods under the Value Added Tax Act of the State; (b) notwithstanding anything contained in Section 13, no tax shall be payable on services under this Act to the extent the tax was leviable on the said services under Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994; (c) where tax was paid on any supply both under the Value Added Tax Act and under Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994, tax shall be leviable under this Act and the taxable person shall be entitled to take credit of value added tax or service tax paid under the existing law to the extent of supplies made after the appointed day and such credit shall be calculated in such manner as may be prescribed. 12. It is clearly evident from Section that the service tax is liable to be paid, which is leviable under the Finance Act'

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 535 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, KARNATAKA – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 181 (A. A. R. – GST) – Levy of GST – landowner – The builder offered to develop and promote a multistoried residential apartment cum commercial building in the property – premises allotted to him, which he intends to distribute among his family members – Held that:- The applicant, being the person Who has supplied development rights to a developer in respect of his land, is liable to registration and payment of tax – Section 22 of the CGST Act 2017 tells about the persons liable for registration and stipulates that Every supplier, who makes a taxable supply of goods or services or both, shall be liable to be registered, if his aggregate turnover crosses the threshold limit prescribed in the Act.
–
The applicant has not furnished any information with regard to transfer of possession of the constructed flats / commercial area or allotment order of the same, in the instant application and hence the a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

018, for advance ruling under section 97 of CGST Act,2017, KGST Act, 2017 & IGST Act, 2017 read with rule 104 of CGST Rules 2017 & KGST Rules 2017, in form GST ARA-01, discharging the fee of ₹ 5,000-00 each under the CGST Act and the KGST Act. 2. The Applicant a land owner, entered into an agreement with M/s. Nforce Infrastructure India Pvt. Ltd., Builders & Developers, Victoria , Door No.25-14-840/1, Near Valencia Church, Kankanady post, Mangaluru – 572 002, for joint development and promotion of the N Force -Pauline , the residential / commercial building at Valencia, Mangalore. The builder offered to develop and promote a multistoried residential apartment cum commercial building in the property belonging to the Applicant as well as the other land owners. Therefore the applicant filed this instant application Seeking ruling on the following issue : Whether the applicant being the land owner is liable to pay GST on premises allotted to him, which he intends to distr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t Agreement. 6. The Applicant, filed this application dated 23.02.2018 for advance ruling, seeking clarification as to Whether the applicant being the land owner is liable to pay GST on premises allotted him, which he intends to distribute among his family members ? . 7. Chapter of the CGST Act 2017 deals with the provision of Advance Ruling and Section 94(a) of the CGST Act 2017 defines Advance Ruling as a decision provided by the Advance Ruling Authority, to an applicant on matters or questions specified in Section 97(2) of the CGST Act 2017, in relation to the supply of goods or services or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. 8. The applicant registered himself with GSTN for the purpose of filing application before the Authority for Advance Ruling. We find that the applicant is liable to be registered, as discussed in the succeeding paragraphs. the application was admitted. 9. The applicant entered into an agreement with M/s. Nforce Infrastructure In

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n the form of transfer of development rights, as the registered persons in whose case the liability to pay central tax on supply of the Said services, on the consideration received in the form of construction service referred to in clause (a) above and in the form of development rights referred to in clause (b) above, shall arise at the time when the said developer, builder, construction company or any other registered person, as the Case may be, transfers possession or the right in the constructed complex, building or civil structure, to the person supplying the development rights by entering into a conveyance deed or similar instrument (for example allotment letter) 11. This notification notifies person or persons Who supply development rights to a developer / builder etc., against a consideration, which may be in the form of construction service, is liable to be registered under CGST/KGST Act 2017. It also provides that the person who supplies the development rights shall pay centra

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t Every supplier, who makes a taxable supply of goods or services or both, shall be liable to be registered, if his aggregate turnover crosses the threshold limit prescribed in the Act. The applicant has not furnished any information with regard to transfer of possession of the constructed flats / commercial area or allotment order of the same, in the instant application and hence the authority presumes that the possession of the constructed flats / commercial area has not been handed over to the Applicant, as on date. 13. The Developer M/s. Nforce Infrastructure India Private Limited, with whom the applicant entered into an agreement for development of his land, has also filed an application seeking advance ruling on certain questions based on the same Joint Development Agreement. Therefore the ruling in the developer s case may also be interest to this applicant. 14. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the Applicant is supplier of a taxable service by way of transfer of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 1278 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – TMI – Levy of GST / import duty goods purchase from Duty free shops – shops situated before immigration clearance by a passenger – Exemption on sale of cosmetic products, perfumes etc. to the International passenger – refund of any input tax paid on input supplies and input services – Held that:- The Central Government holds that the transactions effected at the duty free shops at the arrival or departure of the International Airports in India might have taken place within the geographic territory of India, but for the purposes of levy of Customs Duties or any other taxes, the area of duty free shops shall be deemed to be the area beyond the customs frontiers of India. Although, the applicant bought goods from duty free shop at CSI Airport Mumbai, the same are deemed to be imported from across the Customs Frontiers of India and customs duty is payable on such goods. Since the applicant crossed the green channel without declarations and without

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

services from the retail shop which the petitioner intends to set up at the Domestic Security Hold Area at Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar International Airport (hereinafter referred to as the Nagpur Airport ). 2. It is submitted that presently sale of similar products to international passengers are permitted without levy of Customs duty and applicable taxes under the CGST/IGST/SGST from the duty free shops located in the arrival and departure halls of International Airports in India. Petitioner, therefore, claims that similar benefit should be granted to him so that he can sell the products to International passengers who commence their journey from Nagpur Airport and thereafter, depart from India from a transit International Airport in India from his shop located at the Domestic Security Hold Area at Nagpur. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the process of tender for grant of such shop is in progress and in the event the petition is allowed, petitioner would be able to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

kes on rent a private bonded warehouse located near the Airport as well as certain shops called 'dutyfree shops' at the arrival and departure terminals of the International Airports in India. The duty free operator is granted special warehouse license under Section 58A of the Customs Act, 1962 for depositing notified class of goods and such warehouse are kept locked by the proper Officer and no entry of any person or removal of goods therefrom are allowed without the permission of the proper Officer. The goods are warehoused at the Special Warehouse without payment of duty and then transferred to the dutyfree shops without payment of duty from where they are sold to International passengers without payment of duties and taxes. 3. According to petitioner, the entire movement of goods from Special warehouse to duty free shops for the purpose of sale at arrival and departure strictly happens as per the Warehousing provisions under Chapter IX of the Act and under customs supervisio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ioner submits that with effect from July, 2017, the respondent no.1 promulgated and notified CGST, IGST and various State Governments promulgated SGST. That by virtue of enactment of the GST Legislations, more specifically Proviso to Section 5(1) of the IGST, an importer of goods is liable to levy of integrated tax on goods imported into India. In the case of IntraState supply, when the location of the supplier and the place of supply i.e. location of the buyer are in the same State, a seller has to collect both CGST and SGST from the buyer. The CGST gets deposited with Central Government i.e. respondent no.1 and SGST gets deposited with respondent no.2. The petitioner submits that, due to unique location and nature of business of the duty free shops in India, the duty free operator is neither charged IGST/customs duty on imports nor is required to collect tax under CGST and SGST on the supplies made to the International passengers. 5. In the background of case of petitioner as aforesa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

order dt.31.8.2018 bearing No.634/2018CUS( WZ)/ASRA/MUMBAI passed under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962 in the case of Aarish Altaf Tinwala. 7. To sum up, it is the case of petitioner that presently a lot of International passengers take their fights from the Nagpur Airport to travel outside India through a transit International Airport. An International passenger who departs from the Nagpur Airport to a transit International Airport wherefrom he/she can embark the International flights to foreign destination can get their baggage through checked in at the Nagpur Airport and the Nagpur Airport also issues the said International passenger boarding passes for the flight which travels to the transit International Airport as well as the International flights which departs India. The petitioner submits that once an International passenger through checks in and receives boarding passes at the Nagpur Airport, the products can be sold to him/her without duty and GST. The only difference

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

has completed the immigration formalities, he is said to have entered Indian Territory. Thereafter, the goods purchased from the duty free shop situated in the Arrival Hall are not imported. Hence, any such purchases made from the duty free shop are not liable for imposition of customs duties. Therefore, the impugned goods have been wrongly confiscated by the Customs and should be released. 9. The Central Government is of the considered opinion that the contentions of the application are based on the erroneous belief and wrong interpretation of the law and settled legal positions. 10. Section 2(11), Section 2(25) and Section 2(27) of the Customs Act 1962 states as under : Section 2 : Definitions – In this Act unless the context otherwise requires : (11) customs area means the area of a customs station and includes any area in which imported goods or export goods are ordinarily kept before clearance by the Customs Authorities; (25) imported goods means any goods brought into India from

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

duty on being exported by duty free shops and imported by passenger in terms of Section 77 of the Customs Act, 1962. The contention of the Applicant that he had entered Indian Territory after immigration formalities and having bought goods within the confines of Indian Territory and is, therefore, not liable to pay customs duty is not legally sustainable. 12. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s. Hotel Ashoka vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Anr. (Civil Appeal No.2560 of 2010) reported in (2012) 3 SCC 204 has held that 18. It is an admitted fact that the goods which had been brought from foreign countries by the appellant had been kept in bonded warehouses and they were transferred to duty free shops situated at International Airport of Bengaluru as and when the stock of goods lying at the duty free shops was exhausted. It is also an admitted fact that the appellant had executed bonds and the goods, which had been brought from foreign countri

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

be said to have taken place outside India. Though the transaction might take place within India but technically looking to the provisions of Section 2(11) of the Customs Act and Article 286 of the Constitution, the said transaction would be said to have taken place outside India. In other words, it cannot be said that the goods are imported into the territory of India till the goods or the documents of title to the goods are brought into India. Admittedly, in the instant case, the goods had not been brought into the customs frontiers of India before the transaction of sales had been taken and, therefore, in our opinion, the transactions had taken place beyond or outside the custom frontiers of India. 10. Therefore, the Central Government, in view of the above holds that the transactions effected at the duty free shops at the arrival or departure of the International Airports in India might have taken place within the geographic territory of India, but for the purposes of levy of Custom

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

stoms frontiers of India and the transaction would be said to have taken place outside India. 12. The aforesaid Judgments are clearly applicable only in respect of supplies to or from duty free shops situated after the passenger crosses the immigration counter beyond the Customs Frontiers, at arrival or departure hall of International Airport Terminals, where the transaction would be said to have taken place outside India. The International travel of incoming or outgoing passenger after immigration clearance would be beyond any doubt. In such event, whether it is the sale/purchase/supplies of goods or services, to or from such duty free shop, the same is said to be taken place outside India. Hence, the same would be a nontaxable supply under Section 2(78) of CGST/SGST and such duty free Shops located at the International Airports would be in nontaxable territory as defined in Section 2(79) of CGST/SGST. As per section 2(24) of IGST, the same meaning as given in CGST/SGST applies for IG

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2019 (2) TMI 186 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, TAMILNADU – TMI – Pure service – Providing Inspection services in relation to Water Supply and Sewerage – Government authority – Benefit of SI.No. 3 of Notification No. 12/201 /-CT (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 – applicant providing Third Party Inspection Services to their clients viz., M/s. Chennai Metro Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB) and M/s. Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board (TWAD) for the water related projects – Notification is effective from 01/07/2017 – pure services – taxability of Invoices already raised on the client prior to 01/07/2017.
–
Held that:- If any “Pure Services” are provided to a Governmental Authority by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under Article 243 W or a Panchayat under Article 243 G (from 13.102017) of the Constitution and that 'Governmental Authority' is an Authority or a Board set up by an Act of Parliament or a State legislature or establis

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

1970 with 100% contribution by way of Government and controlled by Government by way of appointing Directors of the TWAD Board entrusted with the development of Water Supply and Sewerage facilities in Municipalities and Panchayats in the State of Tamil Nadu, except Chennai Metropolitan Development.
–
Thus, in respect of services received in relation to functions pertaining to Municipality, M/s. CMWSSB and M/s.TWAD is a 'Governmental Authority' as defined under 2(zf) of the Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) as amended. However, in respect of Services received in relation to functions pertaining to Panchayat, TWAD is a 'Governmental Authority' only from 13.10.2017 as defined under 2(zf) of the Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) as amended.
–
In the two agreements furnished by the Applicant, the Applicant is suppling 'Pure Services' of Inspection to M/s. TWAD and M/s. CMWSSB which is a 'Governmental Authority” relating to Water Supply and Sewerage which are covered under Twelfth

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

du Goods and Service Tax Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the Central Goods and Service Tax Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act. Dr Amin Controllers Private Limited, 120,3rd Floor, Akbar Tower, Thambu Chetty, Parrys, Chennai-600001, Tamil Nadu (hereinafter called the Applicant ) is providing Third Party Inspection Services to their clients viz., M/s. Chennai Metro Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB) and M/s. Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board (TWAD) for the water related projects. They are also rendering Consultancy Services to others and pay CGST taxes and SGST taxes duly, besides carrying on services to Common Effluent Treatment Plant. They are registered vide GSTIN: 33AAACA3912A1ZM. They have sought Advance Ruling on:- 1. Whether the services rendered by them to CMWSSB and TWAD is exempted under S

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

er for purchase of materials from Manufacturers/Suppliers. Before the supply / delivery of materials, the Applicant has to conduct Third Party inspection of materials and submit a report to TWAD/CMWSSB. On the material goods being ready for delivery and inspection, the TWAD/CMWSSB issue a work order, giving details of materials to be inspected Place of inspection and Fee charge etc. On completion of Inspection, the Applicant raise the Invoice for the inspection made by the Applicant to TWAD/CMWSSB along with the inspection report. The Applicant has also submitted that the services rendered by them are Pure Services , without involving any supply of goods/materials. 2.2. The Applicant has also stated that their Clients M/s. CMWSSB and M/s. TWAD have claimed Exemption from CGST/SGST under Notification No 12/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, with effective from 01.07.2017. As per SI No 3 Pure Services (excluding Works Contract) provided to Central Government/State Government/Union

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

now sought Advance Ruling to clarify, Whether the services rendered by them to M/s. CMWSSB and M/s. TWAD are exempted under SI. No. 3 of the Notification No. 12/2017-CT(Rate) dated 28th June, 2017. 3. The Applicant was heard in person. They stated that M/s. CMWSSB and M/s. TWAD are Government Authority and that they supply Services of Quality Inspection based on standards given by M/s. CMWSSB and M/s. TWAD at the premises of the Manufacturer/Contractor, before materials are dispatched and the Applicant is paid percentage of value of materials inspected. The Applicant submitted further information relates to nature of activities and a copy of Agreement dated 02.03.2016, confirming their empanelment with m/s. TWAD, the type of services to be rendered, etc; Agreement dated 05.12.2016 confirming their empanelment with M/s. CMWSSB, the type of services to be rendered, etc; Work Order along with copy of Inspection report & Invoice of the work undertaken for M/s. CMWSSB and M/s. TWAD; M/

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n of equipment/materials. 4.2 On verification of the Agreement , Work Orders with CMWSSB, it is seen that the Applicant was selected was empanelled for conducting Third party Inspection for procurements of Pipes, Pump sets, Electronic Equipment, Chemicals of works involved in extension of Desalination, iron conveying water main from Medavakkam Junction to Alandur Water Distillation Station. The Applicant will also submit a final report on the quality of the equipment based on their inspections. The Applicant will be paid as a percentage of the value of materials inspected. The invoice indicates the charges towards Technical Inspection Testing & Analysis Services of various equipment indicating dates and places of inspection, description of equipment/materials. 4.3 The Applicant has also submitted CMWSSB Act and Annual Report, on verification of which, it is seen that it is a Board constituted by an act of Tamil Nadu State Legislature called Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sew

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rification of which it is seen that it is a Board constituted by an act of Tamil Nadu State Legislature called Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board Act, 1970 with 100% contribution by way of Government and controlled by Government by way of appointing Directors of the TWAD Board. It is entrusted with the development of Water Supply and Sewerage facilities in Municipalities and Panchayats in the State of . Tamil Nadu, except Chennai Metropolitan Development. It is seen that the Secretary in charge of Municipal Administration and Water Supply are on the Board and on setting up of TWAD, all assets, liabilities, legal proceedings and properties relating to Public Health Engineering and Municipal Works Department were transferred to TWAD. 5. The Advance Ruling is sought on the applicability of exemption under Sl.No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017, to the Third Party Inspection services rendered by the Applicant to M/s. CMWSSB and M/s. TWAD under

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t service or other composite supplies involving supply of any goods) provided to the Central Government, State Government or Union territory or local authority or a Governmental authority by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G of the Constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution. Nil Nil (zf) governmental authority has the same meaning as assigned to it in the Explanation to clause (16) of section 2 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017 (13 of 2017): Explanation to Clause (16) of Section 2 of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act (IGST) is given as under: Explanation,- For the purposes of this clause, the expression governmental authority means an authority or a board or any other body.- (i) set up by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature; or (ii) established by any Government, with ninety per cent, or more participation by way of equity or cont

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ty or a Board set up by an Act of Parliament or a State legislature or established by the Government with 90 percent or more participation by way of equity or control to carry out any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243 W of the Constitution, then the same is exempted vide SI.No. 3 of the Notification No. 12/2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 referred above. 6.2 In the case at hand, M/s. CMWSSB is created vide The Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1978 (Tamil Nadu Act 28 of 1978) with 100% contribution by way of Government (i.e. by way of takeover of Assets and Liabilities from Chennai Municipal Corporation and Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board) and controlled by the Government by way of appointing Directors of the CMWSS Board, to carry out the functions of supplying water for Domestic, Industrial and Commercial purposes as well as Sanitation Conservancy by way of disposal of Sewerage. M/s. TWAD Board is a Board, constituted by an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

11 as Drinking Water and at SI. No. 23 as. Health and Sanitation . Thus, it is clear that in respect of services received in relation to functions pertaining to Municipality, M/s. CMWSSB and M/s.TWAD is a 'Governmental Authority' as defined under 2(zf) of the Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) as amended. However, in respect of Services received in relation to functions pertaining to Panchayat, TWAD is a 'Governmental Authority' only from 13.10.2017 as defined under 2(zf) of the Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) as amended. 6.3 On perusal of the scope of work in the empanelment Agreements furnished by the Applicant, we find that in one contract, the Applicant is selected for conducting Third Party Inspection for procurements of Pipes, Open Well Submersible Pump sets Panel Boards, Transformer, Water Meters and other equipment supplied by the L&T Ltd., Chennai to M/s. TWAD under CWSIS to Vellore Corporation and various Municipalities and Towns of Vellore district re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s. CMWSSB in respect of its functions with respect to Municipalities. 6.4 In view of the foregoing, in the two agreements furnished by the Applicant, the Applicant is suppling 'Pure Services' of Inspection to M/s. TWAD and M/s. CMWSSB which is a 'Governmental Authority relating to Water Supply and Sewerage which are covered under Twelfth Schedule of Article 243 W of the Constitution. Therefore, the services rendered by the Applicant are exempted from CGST under SI.No. 3 of the Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 as amended and exempted from SGST under SI.No. 3 of the G.O. (Ms) No. 73 dated 29.06.2017 No.II (2)/CTR/532(d-15)/2017 as amended. 7. The second question raised before us regarding raising of credit notes is of procedural nature and therefore not answered. 8. In view of the foregoing, we rule as under: RULING The activity of the Applicant as per the two contracts i.e. entered into with Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board for conducting Thi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =