Author: admin_gst

2018 (10) TMI 1137 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI – Detention of vehicle with goods – validity of the Ext.P2 e-way bill expired – invoice number was allegedly manipulated – Held that:- The respondent authorities are directed to release the petitioner's goods and vehicle on his furnishing Bank Guarantee for tax and penalty found due and a bond for the value of goods in the form as prescribed under Rule 140(1) of the CGST Rules – petition disposed off. – WP(C). No. 33178 of 2018 Dated:- 11-10-2018 – MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. For The Petitioner : SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM AND SMT.S.K.DEVI For The Respondent : GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES JUDGMENT The petitioner, a dealer under the CSGST Act, sold goods as seen from Ext.P1 invoice. The vehicle and the goo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 1190 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 326 (Ker.) – Detention of vehicle with goods – e-way bill had expired – Section 129 of the SGST Act – After generating that bill, it had the goods loaded into a transport vehicle. But it could not transport them during night hours. The next day, 2nd October, was a holiday. So it could transport the goods only on 3.10.2018 at 10.40 am. – Held that:- The writ petition disposed off settting aside the Ext. P10 – the petitioner can approach the ASTO tomorrow – On the petitioners' approach, the authority will reexamine the issue, keeping in view the petitioner's Ext.P9 explanation and the other materials, and pass orders on the same day – petition disposed off. – WP (C). No. 32692 of 2018 Dated:- 11-10-2018 – MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. For The Petitioner : SRI. K. N. SREEKUMARAN, SRI.N. SANTHOSHKUMAR AND SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR (A-1768) For The Respondent : GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES JUDGMENT The Petitioner, a dealer under the new GST re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the interim custody of the goods, the petitioner must comply with Rule 140 of the CGST Rules: bank guarantee and simple bond for the tax, penalty, and interest, too. So assailing the detention, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 4. After taking me through the record, the petitioner's counsel submits that the delay is minimal and that was under unavoidable circumstances. But the respondent's attitude is hypertechnical. He further draws my attention to Ext.P9 explanation, dt.4.10.2018, the petitioner submitted to the Assistant Sales Tax Officer. According to him, the petitioner issued the e-way bill as per the request from its customs broker, who must have cleared the consignment from the port and delivered it to the petitioner's factory as originally planned-on time. But the customs broker could remove the vehicle from the port only on 03.10.2018. The delay was because, first, the e-way bill was generated on 1st October late in the eveint ; then the next day was a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

strenuously opposed any judicial intervention because once the statutory conditions stand diluted, she continues, it would provide a weapon for the tax evaders. She has also stressed that the respondent authorities following the procedure to a perfection cannot be castigated as hyper-technical. 8. That said, the Government Pleader submits that, as seen from the Ext.P9, the petitioner may have faced a genuine difficulty. If this Court intervenes at this stage, it may become a precedent, throwing the departmental actions out of gear. Instead, she suggests an alternative: this Court may set aside the Ext.P2 and remand the matter to the Assistant State Tax Officer, who will consider the issue afresh, especially, keeping in view the petitioner's Ext.P9 explanation. She further assures the Court that the ASTO will pass orders within 24 hours, once the petitioner approaches him. 9. For this proposal, the petitioner's counsel agrees. 10. So without adverting to the merits, I dispose o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 1616 – KARNATAKA HIGH COURT – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 10 (Kar.) – Unable to form upload TRANS-1 – migration to GST Regime – transitional credit – Held that:- The petitioner-company is therefore relegated before the concerned Nodal Officer (Commissioner) at Bengaluru, before whom the representations already filed by the petitioners-company or which may be now filed afresh with the relevant evidence will be decided by the said Nodal Officer and all the issues relating to administration and technical difficulties faced by the petitioner as raised in the writ petitions will be decided on merits – petition disposed off. – WRIT PETITION Nos.28653/2018 & 29276/2018 (T-RES) Dated:- 11-10-2018 – Dr. VINEET KOTHARI J. Mr. Monish Panda,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Data Base of the Respondent -Government. The assessment orders passed by the 7th Respondent – Asst. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bangalore, has also been challenged in the present writ petitions. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners – company Mr. Monish Panda has urged that despite the representations filed to the Respondent- Commissioner, GST, Bengaluru – the Jurisdictional Officer, he has not been decided such representation after giving a proper and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner-assessee. 4. The learned counsel for the Respondent- Commercial Tax Department Mr. Vikram Huilgol however submits that a separate Nodal Officers at the level of Commissioner have been appointed by the Central Government

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed by the petitioners-company or which may be now filed afresh with the relevant evidence will be decided by the said Nodal Officer and all the issues relating to administration and technical difficulties faced by the petitioner as raised in the writ petitions will be decided on merits with due and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and petitioners complying with the directions of said authority and filing requisite returns and declarations as per the relevant applicable Rules, Circulars and Notifications etc. 6. The petitioners-company should appear before the concerned authority in the first instance on 05.11.2018 at 11 AM and a period of two months is allowed to the said Nodal Authority to pass appropriate orders. Again

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – 138/2018 – Dated:- 11-10-2018 – OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS NS-II JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU CUSTOM HOUSE, NHAVA SHEVA TAL: URAN, DIST. RAIGAD, MAHARASHTRA-400707 F.No.S/12-Gen- Misc-07/2018-19 AM(X) PUBLIC NOTICE NO.138/2018 Date: 11-10-2018 Sub: : Cases where IGST refunds have not been granted due to claiming higher rate of drawback OR where higher rate and lower rate were identical -reg. Attention of all the importers, exporters, customs brokers, and all other stake holders is invited to the Board Circular No. 37/2018-Customs, dated 09.10.2018 on the subject mentioned above. 2. Representations have been received by Board from exporters /export associations regarding cases where IGST refunds have not been granted because higher ra

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ces tax paid on such exports. 2.2 Notes and Condition (12A) of Notfn.No.131/2016-Cus(NT), dated 31.10.2016 (as amended by Notfn.No.59/2017-Cus(NT), dated 29.06.2017 and 73/2017-Cus(NT), dated 26.07.2017) prescribed that The rates and caps of drawback specified in columns (4) and (5) of the said schedule shall be applicable to export of a commodity or product if the exporter satisfies the following conditions, namely:- … … … (ii) If the goods are exported on payment of integrated goods and services tax, the exporter shall declare that no refund of integrated goods and services tax paid on export product shall be claimed;….. . 2.3 In terms of Rules 12 and 13 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Dra

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

larations, the exporters consciously relinquished their IGST / IT claims. 3. It has been noted that exporters had availed the option to take drawback at higher rate in place of IGST refund out of their own volition. Considering the fact that exporters have made aforesaid declaration while claiming the higher rate of drawback, it has been decided that it would not be justified allowing exporters to avail IGST refund after initially claiming the benefit of higher drawback. There is no justification for re-opening the issue at this stage. 4. Action to be taken in terms of decisions taken in this public notice should be considered as a standing order for the purpose of officers and staff. 5. Difficulties, if any, may be brought to the notice of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (11) TMI 799 – PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT – TMI – Unable to upload GST TRAN-1 form – input tax credit – Held that:- N/N. 48, dated September 10, 2018 has been issued for amending the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 giving power to the Commissioner for extension of time for submission of declaration form GST TRAN-1 upto March 31, 2019. The power can be exercised by the Commissioner on the recommendation of the Council – petition disposed off. – CWP-26302-2018(O&M) Dated:- 11-10-2018 – MR RAJESH BINDAL AND MR MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, JJ. For The Petitioner : Mr. Lakhinder Bir Singh, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advocate And Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Addl. AG, Punjab ORDER RAJESH BINDAL, J. The petitioner has filed

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (11) TMI 821 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI – Refund of Excise duty paid during investigation – rejection of refund on the ground that the appellant has not debited the PLA with the amount of ₹ 25 lakhs an debited the same in April, 2017 only and thus, refund claim filed on 23.02.2017 is premature – Held that:- The first appellate authority has not considered the issue holistically, as it is on record and admitted, Order-in-Original No. 34/2009 dated 30.10.2009 confirmed demands raised by the appellant contained in the order portion, an appropriation of amount of ₹ 25 lakhs already paid by the appellant – If an amount of ₹ 25 lakhs stands appropriated on 30.10.2009, the case made out by the revenue that appellant had not debited amount in PLA and hence not eligible for refund is totally incorrect proposition.
–
The adjudicating authority is directed to sanction refund of ₹ 25,00,000/- immediately – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – E/30604/20

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he adjudicating authority appropriated the amount of ₹ 25 lakhs as paid by the appellant during the investigation. Personal penalty of ₹ 16 lakhs was also imposed on the Managing Director of the appellant. Aggrieved by such order, an appeal was preferred to the first appellate authority. After following due process of law, the first appellate authority upheld the Order-in-Original by Order-in-Appeal No. 93 & 94/2011 (H-IV) CE dated 26.12.2011. Appellant contested the said Orderin-Appeal before the Tribunal and Tribunal by Final Order No. A/31327- 31328/2016 dated 18.11.2016 set aside the Order-in-Appeal and allowed the appeals with consequential relief. The said order of the Tribunal is not contested by both sides. Consequently, based upon such final order, appellant filed refund claim with the adjudicating authority for an amount of ₹ 43,96,019/- paid by them during the proceedings as also after the adjudication order was passed. The lower authorities after issui

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

draws our attention to Pg.77 in Appeal Memoranda, wherein the State Bank of India had given certificate that an amount of ₹ 25 lakhs was debited to the account of appellant herein and credited to Government account by GAR-7 Challan No. 66038 dated 13.09.2007 & GAR-7 Challan No. 66044 dated 14.09.2007. It is his submission that once the amount stands credited to the account of Government, the question of debiting PLA and denying refund claim only on this ground is incorrect. He would also draw our attention to Final Order No. 603 & 604/2011 dated 15.09.2011, passed by this bench, when the matters were remanded back to the lower authorities and submits that the Tribunal had also perused that the appellant had paid an amount of ₹ 25 lakhs with the Government. He would submit that the first appellate authority was in error in rejecting the appeal as amounts deposited during the investigation has to be refunded merely on submission of a letter. It is his further submiss

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the assessee needs to be done through e-payment is the law and the challans which are annexed to the appeal memoranda are of physical deposits of the amounts involved. It is his submission that since amounts are not debited in the PLA, it cannot be stated that the said amount was paid to the Government during investigation. 5. I have considered the submission made by both sides and perused the records. 6. The issue involved in this case is regarding the refund of amount of ₹ 25 lakhs which is rejected. The findings of the first appellate authority for rejecting such refund claim are at Para 5.2.1 which is reproduced. 5.2.1. As regards the other ground for rejection of refund claim it is mentioned in the impugned order that the amount of ₹ 25,00,000/- which was deposited against the case registered was taken as credit in their PLA and retained this credit balance; the amount stands accrued to the national exchequer only when the same is debited in PLA; therefore when the amo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

view, the first appellate authority has not considered the issue holistically, as it is on record and admitted, Order-in-Original No. 34/2009 dated 30.10.2009 confirmed demands raised by the appellant contained in the order portion, an appropriation of amount of ₹ 25 lakhs already paid by the appellant. If an amount of ₹ 25 lakhs stands appropriated on 30.10.2009, the case made out by the revenue that appellant had not debited amount in PLA and hence not eligible for refund is totally incorrect proposition. It is also to be noted that Tribunal has also recorded that this amount is debited by the appellant to the Government Treasury. On perusal of certificate issued by the State Bank of India which is annexed to appeal memoranda at Pg. 77, we do find that SBI has categorically stated that amounts are debited to appellant s account on 13th and 14th September, 2007 which would mean that the amounts have been credited with CBEC/Government of India. On such overwhelming evidence

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (12) TMI 337 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Condonation of delay of 215 days in filing appeal – no proper justification given for such delay – difference of opinion – Held that:- As there is difference of opinion, matter is referred to Third Member for resolving the Difference of Opinion on the issue:
–
Whether the delay has to be condoned subject to imposition of cost of ₹ 2000/- as held by the Member (Judicial) or the Condonation of Delay has to be rejected as the appellant has not given plausible and just explanation explaining the delay in filing the appeal, and consequently, the appeal is to be rejected as barred by limitation. – Application No. E/COD/86245/2018 in Appeal No. E/88107/2018 – M/86182/2018 – Dated:- 11-10-2018 – Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Sanjiv Srivastava, Member (Technical) Shri Hemant Suchak, Asstt. Manager (Comm) for the appellant Shri D.S. Chauhan, Supdt. (AR) for the respondent ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa The delay in filing the prese

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

at though … this court has been making a justifiable liberal approach in matters instituted in this Court, but the message does not appear to have percolated to all the other Courts in the hierarchy , the Hon ble Supreme Court observed that Every day's delay must be explained does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay and in fact he runs a serious risk. Similarly, in the case of Namnath Sao Alias Ramnath Sahu & Ors. Reported in (2002) 3 Supreme Court Cases 195, the court observed that the expression "sufficient cause" should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence or inaction or want of bona fides is imputable to a party. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further observed that one thing is clear that the Courts should not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

pragmatism in justice oriented approach. In fact, the Jurisdictional High Court of this bench, the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Chetan Singh Rathod Vs. CC reported in 2015 (323) ELT 685 (Bom.) has condoned the delay refused by the Tribunal by observing that in so far as possible the party should be given an opportunity to contest the matter on merits unless the conduct is such that the delay ought not to be condoned. 3. Though we note that the e:ppellants have not given the details as regards the leaving of job by the concerned person, subsequent procurement of the copy from the Range office but keeping in view that the filing of appeal involves the right of the assessee to challenge the impugned order before the higher appellate forum and appreciating the fact the amount involved is only of ₹ 2.50 lakhs approx, as also by appreciating the prima facie merits of the case, and keeping in view the various Supreme Court decisions referred supra laying down that such refus

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in number of decisions, I am not in agreement with the above order. 6. The ground given is, even if the person left the job without giving any detail, the detail as to person, as to why the appeal has been delayed. There is no explanation on day today basis that delay was on this count. In the absence of any possible explanation explaining day today delay, I am not in a position to agree with the Condonation of Delay of 215 day in filing the appeal. No affidavit has been filed in support of the contentions raised in the application for Condonation of Delay. 7. The appeal is a right but circumscribed certain condition. It is not an absolute right for the assessee. Appeal has to be filed within the prescribed period of limitation. In case of delay, appellant has to explain and thereafter only a Condonation of Delay can be allowed. In absence of plausible and just cause of delay, supported by necessary affidavits and document COD application should be

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2019 (1) TMI 1105 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – capital goods or not – Furniture – Cenvat benefit was denied by the department on the ground that ‘furniture’ classifiable under Chapter 94 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 has not been specified as capital goods – Held that:- In this case, the furniture purchased by the appellant for its business purpose, though is not confirming to the definition of capital goods, but the same should be considered as input, in absence of any restrictions provided in the statute – credit allowed – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – ST/87083/2018 – A/88123/2018 – Dated:- 11-10-2018 – Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Shri Chirag Shetty, Advocate For the Res

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

take Cenvat Credit of Central Excise duty paid on inputs or capital goods, with the objective that such credit should be utilised for payment of central excise duty on the final product cleared from the factory. There is no specific embargo in the Cenvat statute that credit taken on capital goods can only be used/utilised for payment of duty. The credit availed on the inputs can also be utilised for the said purpose. In this case, the furniture purchased by the appellant for its business purpose, though is not confirming to the definition of capital goods, but the same should be considered as input, in absence of any restrictions provided in the statute. I find that in identical situation, this Tribunal in the case of ICICI Lombard General

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Refund of integrated tax paid on goods or services exported out of India – Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as amended. – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Refund of unutilised input tax credit on account of zero rated supplies without payment of tax – Rule 89(4B) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as amended. – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 10-10-2018 – The National Academy of Customs, Indirect Taxes and Narcotics (NACIN) is conducting an examination for confirmation of enrollment of Goods and Services Tax Practitioners (GSTPs) enrolled on the GST Network under sub-rule (2) of Rule 83 and covered by clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 83 of Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017. Such GSTPs are required to pass the examination before 31st December, 2018. The examination will be held on 31.1

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Input tax paid by a vehicle dealer on the purchase of motor car used for demonstration purpose of the customer can be availed as input tax credit on capital goods and set off

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Input tax credit – migration to GST regime – transitional provisions – Whether computers, laptops etc. used by the applicant for providing output service would qualify as inpu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Levy of GST – The supply of medicines and allied items provided by the hospital through the pharmacy to the in-patients is part of composite supply of health care treatment an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Profiteering – Benefit of reduction in the rate of tax – Maggi – realized more price from them than he was entitled to collect and had also compelled them to pay more GST than

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Miruthula Jane – Dated:- 10-10-2018 Last Replied Date:- 10-10-2018 – GST Council has fixed four rates under GST act. The slab tax is 5,12,18 and 28%. If there is increased upto 40% provide has been made in the GST bill. But present situation the maximum GST rate is 28%. Costumers less tax will get the benefit of this. After applying the GST product cost decreased. If any company or factory manufacture any products and sells it to another state then he has

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – 38/1/2017-Fin(R&C)(75) – Dated:- 10-10-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF GOA Department of Finance Revenue & Control Division Notification No. 38/1/2017-Fin(R&C)(75) In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Goa Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Goa Act 4 of 2017), the Government of Goa hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Goa Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- 1. (1) These rules may be called the Goa Goods and Services Tax (Eleventh Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) They shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from the 23rd October, 2017. 2. In the Goa Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, in rule 96, for sub-rule (10), the following sub-rule shall be substituted and shall be deemed

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – 38/1/2017-Fin(R&C)(76) – Dated:- 10-10-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF GOA Department of Finance Revenue & Control Division Notification No. 38/1/2017-Fin(R&C) (76) In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Goa Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Goa Act 4 of 2017), the Government of Goa hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Goa Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- 1. (1) These rules may be called the Goa Goods and Services Tax (Twelfth Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) They shall come into force with effect from the 9th day of October, 2018. 2. In the Goa Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the said rules), in rule 89, for sub-rule (4B), the following sub-rule shall be

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

te of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1272(E), dated the 13th October, 2017 or notification No. 79/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1299(E), dated the 13th October, 2017, the refund of input tax credit, availed in respect of inputs received under the said notifications for export of goods and the input tax credit availed in respect of other inputs or input services to the extent used in making such export of goods, shall be granted. . 3. In the said rules, in rule 96, for sub-rule (10), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely:- (10) The persons claiming refund of integra

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1321 (E), dated the 23rd October, 2017 has been availed; or (b) availed the benefit under notification No. 78/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1272(E), dated the 13th October, 2017 or notification No. 79/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1299 (E), dated the 13th October, 2017 except so far it relates to receipt of capital goods by such person against Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme. . By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa. Sushama D. Kamat, Under Secretary, Fi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 679 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (18) G. S. T. L. J218 (All.) – U.P. Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979, which has been repealed by the GST Act on 01.07.2017 – Held that:- It is left open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority under the GST to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law – petition allowed. – WRIT TAX No. – 1353 of 2018 Dated:- 10-10-2018 – Bharati Sapru And Salil Kumar Rai JJ. For the Petitioner : Rahul Kumar Tyagi For the Respondent : C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 680 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 427 (All.) – Failure to pay GST – Mandi Samiti stopped issuing gate passes to the petitioners as per the order of the GST department – it was alleged that the petitioners have not paid GST, as per the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Held that:- The petitioners would be satisfied if they are allowed to approach the fourth respondent by way of reply to the letter dated 1.8.2018 and directions are issued to consider their reply and decide the mater afresh within time frame. Counsel for respondents has no objection for passing such an order.
–
The petitioners shall furnish their reply to the letter dated 1.8.2018 (Annexure-8) within a period of 10

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ers submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if they are allowed to approach the fourth respondent by way of reply to the letter dated 1.8.2018 and directions are issued to consider their reply and decide the mater afresh within time frame. Counsel for respondents has no objection for passing such an order. Hence, we dispose of the writ petition by the following order. The petitioners shall furnish their reply to the letter dated 1.8.2018 (Annexure-8) within a period of 10 days from today and if such reply is submitted by the petitioners, the fourth respondent shall consider the same in the light of the documents relied upon by the petitioners in support of their claim and pass a speaking order within a period of 15 days therefrom. T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – F.1-11(91)-TAX/GST/2018(Part-II) – Dated:- 10-10-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF TRIPURA FINANCE DEPARTMENT (TAXES & EXCISE) NO.F.1-11(91)-TAX/GST/2018(Part-II) Dated, Agartala, the 10th October, 2018 NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Tripura Act No. 9 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- 1. (1) These rules may be called the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax (Eleventh Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) They shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from the 23rd October, 2017. 2. In the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tification No. 41/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), dated the 23rd October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1321 (E), dated the 23rd October, 2017 or notification No. 78/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1272(E), dated the 13th October, 2017 or notification No. 79/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1299 (E) dated the 13th October, 2017. . By Order of the Governor, (Nagesh Kumar B, IAS) Joint Secretary Government of Tripura Finance Department No

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – F.1-11(91)-TAX/GST/2018(Part-II) – Dated:- 10-10-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF TRIPURA FINANCE DEPARTMENT (TAXES & EXCISE) NO.F.1-11(91)-TAX/GST/2018(Part-II) Dated, Agartala, the 10th October, 2018 NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Tripura Act No. 9 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- 1. (1) These rules may be called the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax (Twelfth Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette. 2. In the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (her

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed the 23rd October, 2017; or (b) availed the benefit of notification No. 78/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1272(E), dated the 13th October, 2017 or notification No. 79/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1299(E), dated the 13th October, 2017, the refund of input tax credit, availed in respect of inputs received under the said notifications for export of goods and the input tax credit availed in respect of other inputs or input services to the extent used in making such export of goods, shall be granted. . 3. In t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

22nd November, 2017 or notification No. 41/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), dated the 23rd October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1321 (E), dated the 23rd October, 2017 has been availed; or (b) availed the benefit under notification No. 78/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1272(E), dated the 13th October, 2017 or notification No. 79/2017-Customs, dated the 13th October, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R 1299 (E), dated the 13th October, 2017 except so far it relates to receipt

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 827 – ITAT CHENNAI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – common inputs/input services, used for manufacture of exempted products and dutiable products – non-maintenance of separate records – credit on certain inputs services also denied – vehicles as well as insurance for money- in-transit.
–
Held that:- It is indeed correct to say that the show-cause notice is silent as to what are the inputs and input services on which the appellants have availed credit for production of Bagasse, Press Mud and Electricity. It is vaguely stated that the appellants have availed credit on inputs and input services for production of Bagasse, Press Mud and Electricity. In the annexure to the show-cause notice also, there is no specific figure shown regarding credit availed separately on inputs and input services.
–
The demand prior to 01.03.2015 has been dropped by the adjudicating authority observing that the requirement to maintain separate accounts would be applicable only to exempted goods pr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e Respondent : Shri R. Subramaniyan, AC (AR) ORDER The brief facts are that the appellants who are engaged in the manufacture of Sugar and Molasses, were issued five show-cause notices alleging wrongly availed credit for the reasons that they have not maintained separate accounts for common inputs/input services, used for manufacture of exempted products and dutiable products. It was also alleged that credit is not eligible on certain services. After due process of law, the original authority in respect of allegation of non-maintaining of separate accounts dropped the demand for the period prior to 01.03.2015 but confirmed the demand after 01.03.2015 in respect of Bagasse, Press Mud and Electricity. In respect of wrongly availed credit on capital goods, the proceedings were dropped. In respect of ineligible input services, the adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings partly but, however, confirmed the demand to the tune of ₹ 2,794/- only. Aggrieved, the appellants filed app

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y] as well as dutiable products [sugar]. The appellants have not availed any credit on inputs/input services for production of such goods. The show-cause notice is totally silent as to what are the inputs or input services that appellants have used in the manufacture of such exempted goods. The appellants have availed credit on any inputs‟ or input services‟ for production of Bagasse, Press Mud and Electricity. He explained the process stating that the inputs such as, sugarcane are crushed and the juice is extracted for manufacture of sugar. The remains from the crushing of sugarcane are the Bagasse. After the sugarcane juice is filtered, the waste product, which is Press Mud is obtained. The appellants have not availed any credit on input or input services for these processes. He submitted that the appellants had explained all these facts in their response to the show-cause notice but the authorities below have not given any weight to these submissions. He relied upon the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d the show-cause notice as well as the orders passed by the authorities below. It is indeed correct to say that the show-cause notice is silent as to what are the inputs and input services on which the appellants have availed credit for production of Bagasse, Press Mud and Electricity. It is vaguely stated that the appellants have availed credit on inputs and input services for production of Bagasse, Press Mud and Electricity. In the annexure to the show-cause notice also, there is no specific figure shown regarding credit availed separately on inputs and input services. The appellants have replied stating that they have not availed any credit on inputs/input services for the production of the impugned goods. Even after giving such explanation in the reply, the authorities below have not considered the submissions made by the appellants in this regard. The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ganga Kishan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. had occasion to consider similar issue that the assessee has not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

thority issuing show cause notice was not clear about Cenvatable inputs used in the production of bagasse. Further, on perusal of the order-in-original, it transpires that although the adjudicating authority has observed that the appellant has used Cenvatable inputs lubricant, etc. , in the manufacture of bagasse (liable to nil rate of excise duty), the adjudicating authority has not referred to any evidence which formed basis of this conclusion. Thus in our view the findings of the Authority is not supported by evidence and is based on unwarranted assumption. Thus in our view the department has failed to establish that the appellant used Cenvatable inputs for production of baggase. Once it is concluded that the department has failed to establish that the appellant used Cenvatable inputs for manufacture of bagasse, Rule 6(2) and Rules 6(3)(i) & (ii) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 are not attracted. As sucfvh, we are of the view that the adjudicating authority as well as appellate aut

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 875 – PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 429 (P & H) – Release of detained goods – allegation is that the same were not accompanied by proper documents – Held that:- The present petition is disposed of permitting the State to withdraw the order passed under Section 130 of the Act, confiscating the goods – In case the petitioner fails to deposit the amount of tax and penalty, if levied in terms of provisions of Section 129 of the Act, needless to add that the State shall be at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law. – CWP No. 23203 of 2018 Dated:- 10-10-2018 – MR RAJESH BINDAL AND MR MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, JJ. For The Petitioner : Mr. J. S. Bedi , Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Ad

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tion. Learned counsel for the State on instructions from Mr. Kalicharan, Proper Officer, Excise and Taxation Department, Punjab fairly submitted that the proceedings initiated under Section 129 of the Act will be concluded after affording hearing to the petitioner and the order of confiscation under Section 130 of the Act be treated as withdrawn. However, in case the petitioner fails to deposit the amount of tax and penalty levied under Section 129 of the Act, the department be given liberty to invoke Section 130 of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not have any objection to the aforesaid procedure being adopted. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is disposed of permitting the State to withdra

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 900 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Refund/rebate of Service Tax paid on export of services – Business Auxiliary Services – service charges in the form of commission by their Parent Company – Export of Service Rule, 2005 – Held that:- The procedure of retaining the service charge/commission amount and only remitting the remaining portion of the proceeds in foreign exchange will have to be necessarily treated as saving of foreign exchange and by implication is akin to receipt of monies in convertible foreign exchange – It is nothing but saving of foreign exchange as the Appellant has retained that portion and not sent the same in foreign exchange to the Parent Company at Singapore along with other said proceeds.
–
Outflow of foreign exchange has been reduced to the extent of commission/service charge retained by the Appellant within India. Such retention has to be necessarily treated as saving of foreign exchange.
–
Appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – ST/86

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

mmission by their Parent Company as per Clause 4 of the service agreement. The said Clause 4 of the service agreement is extracted as under: Clause 4. Compensation for Services The Company shall pay to Import Express compensation for the services as follows: The service provided in Annexure A shall be the cost incurred by Import Express for providing these services plus 4% Import Express shall invoice the Company on a monthly basis. All such payments shall be made by the Company within 7 days from the date of the receipt of such invoice. The amount owed for services rendered by Import Express on behalf of the company may be netted off against the receivables of the company collected by Import Express on behalf of the company. 3. Although the customers made online payment to the Parent Company for the products purchased by them but many times they made payment for the Parent Company s products to the Appellant in India and the appellant in turn after deducting their service charge/commi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nt Company and thereafter remits the net consideration to its Parent Company after deducting their service charges. He further submitted that had the entire amount received from the customer of Parent Company been remitted to Parent Company, the service charges due to Appellants in foreign exchange would have been paid by Parent Company from abroad. But instead of going by this lengthy process the Appellant paid only the net consideration in foreign exchange to the Parent Company and therefore in a way the Appellant has saved the foreign exchange. In other words, it is deemed that the Appellant has received entire consideration for their service charges in convertible foreign exchange as required by the Export of Service Rule, 2005. He also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal (Principal Bench, Delhi) in the matter of National Engineering Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur (2008) TIOL 939 wherein this Tribunal has held that receipt of consideration received in Indian Rupees in lieu of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

liary Services" which are exempted from liability to service tax. 5. The Learned Authorised Representative on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding in the impugned order and submitted that the appeal filed by the Appellant deserves to be dismissed. 6. According to me, since out of the total payment to be made by the Appellant in India to its Parent Company at Singapore, the same was reduced to the extent of his service charges/commission and the remaining amount was remitted to the foreign Parent Company in foreign exchange, and since such Indian Rupees was obtained in lieu of foreign exchange, therefore the same will be deemed to be convertible exchange. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of J. B. Boda & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBDT reported in 2002- TIOL-2578-SC-IT while interpreting convertible foreign exchange under the provisions of Income Tax Act has laid down that brokerage income retained by the assessee acting as agent of foreign reinsurer, out of the premiu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

f J. B. Boda & Co. Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the decision of the Tribunal in the matter of National Engineering Industries Ltd. (supra) and Arafaath Travels Pvt. Ltd. (supra), even the procedure of retaining the service charge/commission amount and only remitting the remaining portion of the proceeds in foreign exchange will have to be necessarily treated as saving of foreign exchange and by implication is akin to receipt of monies in convertible foreign exchange. It is nothing but saving of foreign exchange as the Appellant has retained that portion and not sent the same in foreign exchange to the Parent Company at Singapore along with other said proceeds. Outflow of foreign exchange has been reduced to the extent of commission/service charge retained by the Appellant within India. Such retention has to be necessarily treated as saving of foreign exchange. Therefore the appellant is entitled for refund and as a result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed. (Pronounced in Court

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =