Author: admin_gst

In Re: M/s. Utkal Polyweave Industries (P) Ltd.,
GST
2018 (12) TMI 1090 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ODISHA – 2019 (21) G. S. T. L. 108 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ODISHA – AAR
Dated:- 16-11-2018
Order No. 05/ODISHA-AAR/2018-19
GST
SRI ANAND SATPATHY, AND SRI NILANJAN PAN, MEMBER
Present for the Applicant: Shri Vinay Kumar Shraff, Advocate. Shri B. Maharana, Asst Manager (Com) of the Company
Subject: GST Act, 2017-Advance Ruling U/s 980n 'Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags'
1.0 M/s. Utkal Polyweave Industries (P) Ltd., 26-Ganeswarpur Industrial Estate, Januganj, Balasore-756019, Odisha (hereinafter referred to as the 'Applicant') assigned with GSTIN 21AAACU3799H1Z8 having registered address at 26-Ganeswarpur Industrial Estate, Januganj, Balasore-756019, Odisha have filed an application on 28.08.2018 under Section 97 of CGST Act, 2017 & OGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 104 of CGST Rules 2017 & OGST Rules, 2017 in Form GST ARA-01 seeking

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

3% to 4%.
2.2 That the manufacturing process includes manufacturing of polypropylene strips (tapes). PP Strips (tapes) Bobbin are fed on the loom and PP Leno Fabric is manufactured by weaving and than fabric is rolled in a Roll. The warp strips are twisted together in pairs between the weft of filing strip. Leno fabric is then rolled and fabric rolls are cut into desired length which is converted to form a bag (sacks).
2.3 That chapter heading 6305 relates to Sacks and bags, of a kind used for packing of goods. Further sub heading 63053300 relates to Sacks and bags, of a kind used for packing of goods made from manmade textile materials of polyethylene or polypropylene strip or the
2.4 That Note 1(g) to Section XI of the Tariff Act states that the Section of Textile and Textile Articles covering Chapters 50 to 63 does not include, “Monofilament of which any cross-sectional dimension exceeds 1 mm or strip or the like (for example, artificial straw) of an apparent width exceeding 5 mm

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

alf of the company. He re-iterated the earlier submission made in the application. During personal hearing, it was reported that earlier (before implementation of GST), P P Leno Bags were cleared under chapter 39 of the GST Tariff heading. However, during personal hearing the Ld. Advocate submitted additional written submission wherein he argued that 'wrong classification of the goods at one stage does not operate as estoppels/res judicata for subsequently claiming correct classification'. In this regard, he placed reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal Vs. Mahakoshal Potteries reported in 2005 (183) E.L.T.289 (Tri-Del) = 2005 (2) TMI 183 – CESTAT, NEW DELHI and Several Judgments of other Tribunals.
3.1 The Jurisdictional Officer of State GST & the jurisdictional Officer of Central GST appeared in person. The officer concerned of CGST informed that in the similar case, the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling Goods

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

P Leno Bags' under GST Tariff heading. The applicant contended that the said goods are coming under chapter heading 63053300. In this regard, they have submitted copies of the reports of test conducted by the central institute of plastic engineering & technology dated 26.07.2018 and the Indian institute of packaging dated 02.08.2018 on their samples of P P Leno Bags. Further, the applicant also submitted a copy of IS 16187:2014 issued by the Bureau of Indian Standards, providing specifications for P P Leno Woven Sacks for packaging and storage of fruits and vegetables.
4.2 Notwithstanding the aforementioned certification by different certifying agencies, the issue for consideration by this forum is simply to determine the relevant HSN Code under which the goods manufactured by the applicant for supply is classifiable. This forum is not mandated to give any opinion on the standard or manufacturing process of the product manufactured by the applicant. In this regard, the goods manufact

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

th plastics, or articles thereof, of Chapter 39;”
This implies that Goods/Articles covered under Chapter 39 are not to be classified under any of the Chapters falling under Section XI. It further implies that articles of plastics specified under Chapter 39, even if woven are not to be classified under any of the Chapters including Chapter 63 falling under Section XI.
4.4 In Chapter 39, in Tariff heading 3923, under sub-heading 39232990, PP sacks and bags are very well covered. There being a clear sub-heading in Chapter 39 assigned to PP Sacks and bags, the same can not be included in Chapter 63 and more specifically under subheading 63053300
4.5 The applicant has placed reliance on order no. 09/WBAAR/2018-19 dated 06.07.2018 = 2018 (7) TMI 391 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, WEST BENGAL of the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling, Goods and Service Tax in the case of M/s. Mega Flex Plastic limited, Howrah, wherein, the authority, classified “P P Leno bags” under Tariff sub head

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he HDPE bags are the bags woven by the plastic strips and they, therefore, are goods of plastic and the materials used for weaving those bags being the strips of plastic made from plastic granules, the strips of plastic used for weaving the aforesaid HDPE woven sacks has to be classified as an item under entry 39.20 of Chapter 39 and not under  entry 54.06 of chapter 54. Accordingly, the entries of the finished goods have also to be made under the proper chapter of the Tariff Act treating them as the finished goods made of plastic strips.
In the result we hold that HDPE strips or tapes fall under the Heading 39.20 subheading 3920.30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act and not under Heading 54.06, sub-heading 5406 90. Similarly the HDPE sacks fall into Heading 39.23, sub-heading 3923.90″
4.7 Tariff heading 3923 includes goods that are classifiable as 'Articles for the conveyance or packing of goods, of plastics; stoppers, lids, caps and other closures, of plastics'. Polypropylene Le

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he exclusion in the Chapter Note I(h) appearing under Chapter X', Woven Fabrics and articles thereof specified under Chapter 39 are not to be covered by the articles mentioned against the heading 63053300.
4.8 Further, as per the existing CBEC Revised Duty Drawback rates schedule applicable w.e.f. 01.10.2017, “polypropylene woven fabrics/bags/sacks, whether or not laminated, with or without C.V. stabilization, with or without liners/fasteners” are specifically classified under drawback chapter 39 under Tariff Item 392302 The item under consideration being woven bags of polypropylene therefore merits classification under this Chapter as it stands today without any ambiguity.
RULING
In view of the foregoing discussions, we pass the following ruling
The item “Polypropylene Leno Bags (PP leno Bags)”, be classified under GST Tariff Heading '3923 29 90'.
The instant application stands disposed of accordingly.
The applicant or the jurisdictional officer, if aggrieved by the ruling given

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Extension of rectification facility for IGST Export Refunds through Officer Interface upto 15.11.2018 and introduction of Refund through Refund mechanism for Short paid IGST
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 109/2018 Dated:- 16-11-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (AIRPORT & ADMN)
AIR CARGO COMPLEX, NSCBI AIRPORT, KOLKATA: 700 052.
F. NO. S41(Misc) – 64/2017CCX/Pt
Date: 16.11.2018
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 109/2018
Subject: Extension of rectification facility for IGST Export Refunds through Officer Interface upto 15.11.2018 and introduction of Refund through Refund mechanism for Short paid IGST.
Attention of all the exporters, Custom House Brokers, all Carriers/Airlines Agents and all Members of Trade is invited towards CBIC Circular No. 40/2018. Customs dated 24.10.2018 regarding extension in SB005 Alternative Mechanism and revised processing in certain cases including disbursal of Compensation Cess.
2. Exporters are receiving the refunds o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ined and it has been decided by the Board to extend the rectification facility to Shipping Bills filed up to 15.11.2018.
4. It may be noted that SBs which have not been scrolled due to the IGST paid amount erroneously declared as `NA' are already being handled through officer interface as per Board's Circular 08/2018 – Customs dated 23.03.2018. However no such provision was hitherto available in respect of those Shipping Bills which were successfully scrolled, albeit with a lesser than eligible amount.
5. CBIC has been receiving representations where the refund scroll has been generated for a much lesser IGST amount than what has actually been paid against the exported goods. Broadly, this has happened due to:
a. Error made by the exporter/CHA in declaring the IGST paid amount in Shipping Bill or,
b. Cases where Compensation Cess paid amount was not entered by the exporter in the Shipping Bill along with the IGST paid amount or the same details were not transmitted by GSTN,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

resh scroll will be available for generation for the differential amount only.
8. It may be noted that only those Shipping Bills which have already been scrolled shall be available in this facility. Further, this facility can be used only once for each eligible Shipping Bill to sanction the revised IGST amount. Thus, utmost care should be taken by the exporter while submitting the RRR as no further provision will be available for revising the refund sanction again.
9. Difficulties, if any, faced in the implementation of this Public Notice may be brought to the notice of the undersigned.
Enclosed : Format of Revised Return Request (RRR).
(Manish Chandra)
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (A & A)
ACC, NSCBI AIRPORT, KOLKATA
=============
Document 1
Annexure: Revised Refund Request (RRR)
SB Number:
SB Date:
Port Code:
GSTIN:
IEC:
Exporter Name:
Sl No
GST Invoice IGST
Sl. No
Number/
Amount
Date
Corresponding
SB Invoice No.
/Date
IGST
Final
Amount
(corrected)
as
IGST
de

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. CITI Bank N.A. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai North
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 14 – CESTAT CHENNAI – (2024) 132 GSTR 140
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 16-11-2018
ST/Misc/40776/2017 & ST/40923/2017 – Final Order No. 42902/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri N. Venkataraman, Senior Advocate for Ms. Sweta Rajan, Shri Ranjeet Mehtani & Shri Karthi Visalakshi, Advocates for the Appellants
Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, ADC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
1.1 The facts of the case narrated in paragraphs 2 to 2.2 of the impugned order is as under:-
“During the course of audit of accounts of the assessee by Service Tax Internal Audit Group of Service Tax Commissionerate, Chennai, it was noticed that the assessee was issuing credit cards to its customers; that credit card transactions typically involve two banks – an issuing bank and an acquiring bank; that issuing

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ub International) acts as a bridge between the assessee (Issuing Bank) and acquiring banks; that Card Association provides the required network and platform to the issuing banks and acquiring banks for facilitating the cards transactions; that normally acquiring bank submits the transactions (settled by merchants) to the Card Association in a standard file format for onward submission to the assessee (issuing bank); that the standard file format contains details like card number, acquirer reference number, transaction amount, interchange fee, date of transaction, nature of merchant business etc.; that based on the transaction details received from the Card Association, the assessee (issuing bank) bills the customer for gross amount and pays the gross amount less interchange fee (which is credited by the acquiring banks) by remitting the same through the Card Association; that assessee (issuing bank) normally receives the gross amount from their customers based on the monthly billing st

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ing bank is not rendering any service to acquiring bank and hence no service tax is applicable on the proportionate share of MDR received by issuing bank in the form of interchange; that taxing the interchange as share of MDR, in hands of issuing banks would amount to double taxation as the gross MDR has already been subjected to service tax; that since service tax was paid on the entire MDR, their liability, if any, should be adjusted accordingly. They also enclosed (1) a Note on Credit card transactions and applicability of service tax and (2) an excel sheet showing the workings of the interchange earning and details of MDR. However, on their own accord, the assessee paid an amount of Rs. 15,00,00,000/- towards service tax vide Challan No. 11046 dated 28.3.2013″.
1.2 Four show cause notices were issued to the appellants covering the period from October 2007 to March 2015 alleging that service tax liability is required to be discharged on these fees under taxing entry for “Credit Car

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ships, services are provided by the former to the latter and service tax is charged on the consideration for the respective services, none of which is contested by the Department:
a) service provided by the Issuing Bank to the Card Holder is levied to service tax
b) service provided by the Acquiring Bank to the Merchant Establishment is service tax paid
c) services provided by the Card Network to the Acquiring Bank is tax paid, and
d) services provided by the Card Network to the Issuing Bank is charged to tax.
(iii) The payment by Merchant Establishments to the Acquiring Bank known as Merchant Discount Fee includes a portion (known as Interchange Fees) that is shared by the Acquiring Bank with the Issuing Bank and the case of the Respondent-Department is that Issuing Bank receives Interchange Fees for services rendered to CN and which is not taxed.
(iv) In a typical transaction, services are provided by one person to the next in the supply chain and consideration is received for

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ly be collected at the Acquiring Bank's end through his client, and in no other way, in the process of settlement which is based on a technological platform.
(vi) If the collection of fees (of the Acquiring Bank and the Issuing Bank) was broken into two parts and so changed, the Issuing Bank's fee charged to the Card Holder (its customer) may have borne the form and shape of interest and not suffered service tax. Numerically, as a result of the settlement mechanism presently followed, the entire transaction has suffered service tax. The Interchange Fees that is earned by the Issuing Bank is taxed as part of and in the hands of the Acquiring Bank i.e. at first point. Since service tax is already levied on the Interchange Fees, the same cannot once again be subjected to service tax in the hands of the Issuing Bank.
(vii) The adjudicating authority has relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Standard Chartered Bank Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai – I – 20

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

was that there was a service by the Issuing Bank to the Acquiring Bank, therefore, whether or not Interchange Fee was consideration for service was not in question before the Hon'ble Tribunal. This is contrarian to the submission of the Appellant in the present case and finding in the OIO.
c. It was not the submission of the assessees (in that case) that Interchange Fee was not consideration for services, therefore, the Hon'ble Tribunal did not have the occasion to decide whether or not the activity of the Issuing Bank was a service and covered by the taxing entry for CCS. If a particular issue has been decided in a judicial precedent wherein a specific argument was not advanced / raised and hence, the same was not discussed, then a subsequent matter where such argument is raised cannot be considered to be on the same footing as the matter and findings in the said judicial precedent:
* Mittal Engineering Works (P) Ltd vs. CCE, Meerut [1996 (88) E.L.T. 622 (S.C.)]
* H.H. Maharajadh

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Fee component with the issuing bank, which fact has been clearly brought forth and informed in the filing with the CBEC on various dates and way back in 2006.
(x) The United States Tax Court in the case of Capital One Financial Corporation & Subsidiaries Vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue as reported in 133 T.C. No. 6, involving similar service has held that “interchange is not a fee for any service other than the lending money to cardholders, the income from which is generally treated as interest; interchange compensates banks for the costs of lending”. The US Tax Court has concluded “that interchange is not a fee for any service other than lending money to cardholders, income from which is generally treated as interest. The petitioners have shown that interchange fees are a form of interest compensating Capital One for the costs of lending money”.
(xi) The impugned order traverses beyond the scope of the show cause notice. The demand in the show cause notices is on the premise th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

re of the entire issue, and in fact, the clarifications were being awaited by IBA of which the appellant is a member, the allegation of suppression, fraud, mis-statement or intention to evade payment of tax could not be foisted on the appellant. Secondly, the entire period of limitation could not have been invoked in the impugned show cause notice. Hence on these grounds and on the ground of limitation also, the entire proceedings may be set aside.
3.1 On the other hand, ld. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy supported the findings in the impugned order. The Credit Card Services was carved out of Banking and Other Financial Services and made separate taxable category with effect from 1.5.2006. He much relied upon the decision of Larger Bench in the case of Standard Chartered Bank Ltd. (supra). He referred to para 41 of the judgment and argued that the Larger Bench had also analyzed the issue of interchange fee received as settlement services and observed that such services have brought with

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

/ terms & conditions. Service fees are charged to service tax.
b) Credit Card holders (CH) – The Card Holder is the customer to whom the Issuing Bank issues a credit card. The credit card evidences a potential line of credit established by the Issuing Bank using which the Card Holder may purchase goods or services at any of the Merchant Establishments.
c) Acquiring Bank (AB) – The Acquiring Bank is a bank which recruits, screens, and accepts Merchant Establishments into a Card Network's network. They provide a Point of Sale (hereinafter referred to as 'POS') machines to Merchant Establishments which enable Merchant Establishments to validate and accept credit card payments. The Acquiring Bank processes credit card transactions for Merchant Establishments within the respective Card Network and also operates per the respective Network's Operating Regulations. Any service fees (typically Merchant Discount Fee / MDF) from Merchant Establishment is fully charged to service tax.
d) Merch

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rd transaction. The Card Network prescribes the Operating Rules and the 'Interchange Fees‟ that IBs earn besides manage interchange flow between banks. The CN in most cases is located outside India. The charges levied by CN, whether to the Acquiring Bank or Issuing Bank suffer service tax under the reverse charge mechanism.
5.3 The transaction processes has been capsulated in following flow charts in the impugned order, which is as under:-
5.4 In the flow charts given above, for transaction of Rs. 100/- shown, the interchange fee of Rs. 2/- is the amount which is under dispute in these appeals. Revenue insists that it would fall within the ambit of the service tax liability under Credit Card Services.
5.5 Appellant, however, contests the demand on the following counts:-
* No service is rendered
* There is no service provider-service recipient relationship
* There is no consideration payable by the service recipient to the service provider
* Interchanging fees is in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

aken a stand that no proof has been furnished to that extent. Moreover, the interchange fee is the consideration given to issuing bank for validating the transaction and the MDR is the consideration for the acquiring bank for settling the merchant establishment.
5.8 We further find that although the appellant in the course of adjudication proceedings had contended that the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Standard Chartered Bank (supra) is not applicable to the present case, no discussion or counter response to that assertion has been made by the adjudicating authority in the impugned order. Per contra, during the hearing, the ld. AR made arguments that the said Larger Bench decision was very much applicable to the facts of the present case also. However, after careful perusal of the decision, we find ourselves in agreement with the ld. Senior Advocate. The issue in question in the Standard Chartered Bank case was whether interchange fee received by the issuing bank fro

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e Tribunal in ABN Amro Bank (supra), the case law of Standard Chartered Bank had been agitated before the Bench. Further, on going through Standard Chartered Bank decision, we find that the primary issue that was dealt with by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal was in respect of services provided by issuing bank to acquiring bank and acquiring bank to merchant establishment. The Tribunal had held that these were distinct services and outside the purview of Credit Card Services prior to 1.5.2006. Of course, the Larger Bench had held that interpretation in respect of the reference whether merchant establishment discount can be said to be “received in relation” to credit card services in particular transaction wherein bank receiving discount may not have received that and the credit card delivered.
5.10 Viewed in this light, notwithstanding the contentions of the ld. AR, we find that the Standard Chartered Bank decision of Larger Bench supra does not help the case of the Revenue and on the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

(8) G.S.T.L. 225 (All.).
7. Moreover, we have gone through the definition as under Section 65(33A) Clause (iii) herein is reproduced below:- “By any person, including an issuing bank and an acquiring bank, to any other person in relation to settlement of any amount transacted through such card.”
8. On going through the said definition, we find that if the appellant is receiving certain commission in relation to settlement of any amount, then and only then the said activity is covered under credit card services. Admittedly, the appellant is not engaged in any activity of settlement of the amount. In fact, the appellant is not the settlement agency and is acting only as issuing bank. It is admitted position by the learned Commissioner in the impugned order. In that circumstances, we hold that the amount received by the appellant does not qualify as the 'credit cards services'. 5 APPEAL No. ST/1921/2012-CU[DB] Therefore, we hold that the demand against the appellant is not sustainable.”

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Siemens Limited Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Puducherry
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 85 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 16-11-2018
ST/Misc. /41579/2018 and ST/400/2011 – Final Order No. 42903/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri R. Sai Prashanth, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri A. Cletus, Addl. Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of Accesses Control System, Fire Control Systems and parts thereof. They are registered for providing erection, commissioning and installation services and were paying service tax on such services. Based on intelligence, officers initiated investigation. During the course of verification, it was noticed that appellants have entered into a master agreement with M/s. Europlex – Ireland for receiving R&D services. By such agreement, it was agree

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

communication products and software. As per clause 2.3 of the agreement entered into between the appellant and M/s. Europlex, it is agreed that M/s. Europlex shall establish and maintain separate department which will carry on the requirement of research and development on projects and products of the appellant. In clause 3.3 of the agreement, it is agreed that if the development results in any copyrights, the same shall belong to the appellant alone and that M/s. Europlex will not have any proprietary right over such copyright. As per clause 4 of the master agreement, M/s. Europlex would charge the appellant for the expenses incurred by it and the appellant has the right to inspect and audit the accounts of M/s. Europlex. Thus, what was paid by the appellant was only reimbursement of the fixed cost incurred by M/s. Europlex on wages and salaries, rent and cleaning charges, repair and maintenance charges travel etc. That being reimbursable expenses, the appellant is not liable to pay s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rvice in one or more disciplines of science or technology as an institution or scientist or technocrat. In the present case, M/s. Europlex is not a scientist or technocrat. It is a subsidiary company of the appellant herein and therefore has not rendered any service falling under this category. He placed reliance in the cases of Kopram Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad – 2011 (23) STR 627 as well as Yamaha Motors India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi – 2005 (186) ELT 161. The appellant is not a client of M/s. Europlex and thus no service tax is liable to be paid on the said transaction. It is argued by him that the appellant have been discharging service tax under consulting engineer service from 2008 and therefore the demand under scientific or technical consultancy service cannot sustain. Further, the entire exercise is revenue neutral since if the service tax is paid by them under reverse charge, the appellant would be able to take CENVAT credit of the same being input servic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ncy Service is also without any legal basis. M/s. Europlex being a body corporate is an organization. They have rendered assistance for research and development and therefore the services are in the nature provided in the definition of scientific or technical consultancy service. Merely because the intellectual property rights are retained by the appellant, the transaction would not fall outside the purview of scientific or technical consultancy service. Under section 66A, the appellants are liable to pay service tax on the amount paid to M/s. Europlex and therefore the demand confirmed is legal and proper.
4. Heard both sides.
5.1 For better appreciation, the definition of Scientific and Technical Consultancy service defined under section 65(92) is reproduced under:-
“Scientific or technical consultancy means any advice, consultancy or scientific or technical assistance, rendered in any manner, either directly or indirectly, by a scientist or technocrat or any science or technology

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

vity in regard to R&D. Though in Annexure – I, the cost include wages and salaries, rent etc. in clause 4 of the agreement, the amount to be paid by appellant to M/s. Europlex is said to be a compensation for the R&D support and hosting charges. From the records before us, we are not satisfied that the amount paid are actual reimbursable expenses and therefore the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case is not applicable to the facts of this case.
5.3 To appreciate the second contention of the appellant that the transaction does not fall within the definition of 'Scientific or Technical Consultancy' services, it is necessary to extract the relevant portion of the agreement, which is as under:-
“WHEREAS SBTPL desires to obtain the services of ETL in the performance of research and development services and desires to enter into this MASTER AGREEEMENT FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE for the products more particularly, described in the Annexure to this Agreement an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

PROJECT AGREEMENT, shall, whenever created, exclusively own all right, title and interests in and to the DEVELOPMENT RESULTS regardless of the stage of development reached with (or the respective AFFILIATE) right to use and exploit them in any desired way including the right to copyright and patent.
For the purposes of this AGREEMENT or any project agreements pursuant to this AGREEMENT, the words and expressions hereinafter defined in this clause shall have the respective meanings assigned to them:
“DEVELOPMENT RESULTS” shall mean INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS and KNOW-HOW.
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
SBTPL shall at its sole discretion, be entitled to use such inventions or protectable ideas / proposals for any technical use and to file for patents and other statutory protection in any country in its own name as it sees fit, and to maintain or abandon those rights at any time, the INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS arising on the basis of any such registration shall belong to SBTPL.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

urposes based on the monthly accounts of ETL. It is estimated that the annual compensation for the R&D support and hosting charges will be Euros 1.71 million.
SBTPL reserves the right to audit the records to verify the correctness of allocations to R&D expenses. In case there are any errors related to wrong billings, ETL shall promptly refund and repay to SBTPL the allocation paid in excess.”
5.4 Thus, it is seen that the scope of the agreement is that M/s. Europlex, which has R&D capacities has to establish, maintain and host a separate technology department to carry out mission of assistance for research and development for projects / products of appellant and its affiliates. In 3.1 as well as 3.5 of the agreement, it is agreed between the parties that if any intellectual property right results out of the said R&D activity, the same shall belong to the appellant and that M/s. Europlex shall not have any rights whatsoever on such patent or copyrights. The appellants have argued th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d that the assistance given by M/s. Europlex to the appellant for its research and development activity is nothing but technical assistance for improvement of its projects / products.
5.5 The argument of the ld. counsel that M/s. Europlex is a manufacturing unit and not a scientist or technocrat or any science or technical institution or organization so as to fall within the definition is also without any merit. M/s. Europlex being a registered company would fall within the category of 'organization' and therefore the technical assistance rendered by M/s. Europlex to the appellant would fall within the definition of Scientific or Technical Consultancy service. The reliance placed by the ld. counsel in the case of Wanbury Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2016 (43) STR 226, in our view, is of no assistance. In the said case, in para 15, the Tribunal has noted that the transfer of know-how does not require any adaption to industrial ambience and these do not fall within scientif

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r reverse charge, the appellant being service recipient, they would be eligible for credit being an input service. It is correct that during the impugned period there was no embargo in availing credit on service tax paid reverse charge mechanism. The Scientific or Technical Consultancy services being input services, the appellants would be eligible for credit. When appellants are eligible to take credit, there can be no intention to evade payment of tax. The show cause notice for the period October 2007 to April 2008 has been issued on 24.4.2010. Being a revenue neutral situation, as per the decisions of the Tribunal, the demand raised invoking extended period is not sustainable. The appellants had disclosed the amounts in the accounts and financial statement. The issue whether the transaction would fall under Scientific or Technical Consultancy service is interpretational too. Further, apart from a bald allegation that appellant suppressed facts there is no positive act on the part of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

New Measures to Combat Tax Evasion: Stricter Verification and Monitoring for Benami GST Registrations Underway.
Circulars
GST – States
Benami GST Registration – Instructions on measures to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Polypropylene Leno Bags Classification Dispute: Doctrine of Equitable Estoppel Blocks Tariff Heading Change Under GST.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification of goods under GST – Since the Respondent declared that Polypropylene Leno Bags manufactured by weaving polypropylene strips (tapes) under Tariff Heading 3923 29 90 for claiming duty drawback, and no explanation could be offered as to why the Tariff Heading should be changed now to 6305 33 00, it is not permissible under the doctrine of equi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Applies to Online Educational Journals for Indian Institute of Management, Bengaluru; No Exemption Available.
Case-Laws
GST
Liability of GST – supply of online educational journals or per

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Composite Supply Contract: Principal Supply is Custom Milling of Paddy with 5% GST Rate for Entire Agreement.
Case-Laws
GST
Liability of GST – as the said contract comprises of two or more supplies (i.e. transportation, supply of packing material & incentives) and one of which is principal supply i.e. custom milling of paddy, it shall treated as composite supply – rate of GST to be determined based on principal supply i.e. 5%.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotati

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST ANTI-PROFITEERING LAW: TAKEAWAYS FROM NAA RULINGS
By: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 15-11-2018

Statutory Provisions
The provisions are contained in the GST law as per following provisions:
CGST Act, 2017
Section 171 on Anti-profiteering measures
IGST Act, 2017
Section 20 which stipulate that provisions of CGST Act, 2017 shall apply mutatis mutandis to IGST Act
UTGST Act, 2017
Section 21 which stipulate that provisions of CGST Act, 2017 shall apply mutatis mutandis to UTGST Act
SGST Act, 2017
Section 171 on Anti-profiteering measures
The Rules for Anti Profiteering are contained in Chapter XV (Rule Nos. 122 to 137) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
Section 171 provides that it is mandatory to pass on the benefit due to reduction in rate of tax or from input tax credit to the consumer by way of commensurate reduction in prices.
Scope and Objective
Anti-profiteering is a new concept being tried out for the fi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rom the NAA orders passed so far.
Though the NAA concluded in more than half of these orders that profiteering could not be established or was absent, yet in the other cases / complaints, indulgence in Anti-profiteering was established and penal action taken. The NAA orders can be tabulated as follows:
NAA Orders: A Snapshot
Complaint Against
Issue
Anti-Profiteering
M/s Vrandavaneshwree Automotive Pvt. Ltd.
Price difference on sale of car in GST regime booked in pre-GST regime
Not established
M/s KRBL Ltd
Levy of GST @5% on branded rice in GST regime
Not established
M/s Schindler India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
Purchase of lift before and after GST, GST charged on excise duty
Not established
M/s Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore
Discount withdrawn on sale of Godrej almirah on Flipkart
Not established
M/s Sharma Trading Company
Rate of Vaseline reduced from 28% to 18%, but supplier charged 28%
Upheld
M/s Pyramid Infratech Pvt. Ltd.
ITC benefit on construction not p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

guidance.
Underlying Principles
Based on the Orders of NAA, following principles of anti-profiteering law can be established:
* A supplier cannot be allowed to resort to profiteering.
* GST benefit irrespective of the amount has to be passed on to the buyer.
* Cases of Anti-profiteering have to be determined on case to ease basis taking into account tax benefit, other costs etc.
* Benefit cannot be denied on the grounds of convenience to retailer or customer in terms of price, being in whole number (e.g. on ₹ 5 per pack benefit was 21 paisa only and hence not passed on).
* Rate change should result in commensurate reduction in price of product/ service.
* Anti-profiteering law is applicable to both, B2B and B2C transactions.
* Benefit on a particular product cannot be passed on or transferred to other products of the same company and benefit denied to a class of customers. It should be done product wise, not even an a basket of products.
* Benefit should be pas

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n / respective State.
* Penalty can be levied but after due adjudication, following principles of natural justice.
* Anti-profiteering cases are booked on pan India basis. In other words, NAA has jurisdiction all over India.
* Complaints / cases are processed either on complaint or on suo moto basis by DGAP.
* Complaints can be made against anti-profiteering irrespective of the amount involved (small or big).
* Over pricing / indulgence in profiteering would tantamount to issuance of incorrect invoices attracting penalty u/s 122 of the GST law.
* Implementation / monitoring of order can be directed to be done of DGAP.
The aforementioned principles or assertions have been drawn from decided orders of NAA based on factual matrix and legislative intention.
Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN as =
Very nice article.
Dated: 15-11-2018
Reply By Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal as =
Thanks so much, Dr. Govindrajan.
I am one of your silent admirers.
Dated: 15-11-2018
Reply By DR.MARIAP

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Corrigendum in RGST notification No. F.12(46)FD/Tax/2017-pt-II-127 dated 30th October 2018.
F.12(46)FD/Tax/2017-Pt-III-129 Dated:- 15-11-2018 Rajasthan SGST
GST – States
Rajasthan SGST
Rajasthan SGST
GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
(TAX DIVISION)
CORRIGENDUM
Jaipur, dated: November 15, 2018
No.F.12(46)FD/Tax/2017-Pt-III-129.- The English version of this Department's notification no. F.12(46)FD/Tax/2017-pt-II-127, dated the 30th October, 2018 shall be read with

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SHRI. A. BALASUBRAMANIAN Versus THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO. 1, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD AND MS. NAMASCO TRADERS AND EXPORTS, KUTHUPARAMBA
GST
2018 (11) TMI 1189 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 15-11-2018
WP (C). No. 8186 of 2018
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The Petitioner : ADVS. SRI. T. M. SREEDHARAN (SR. ) AND SRI. V. P. NARAYANAN
For The Respondent : SMT. M. M. JASMINE, GP
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a businessman in Tamilnadu, is the consignor of goods sent across to Kerala. On 7. 3. 2018 the Assistant State Tax Officer, Palakkad, detained the goods on these two grounds.
i. GSTIN of the recipient is incorrect, which is in violation of Rule 46 of the CGST Rules

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

The Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
F-A-3-39-2018-1-V-(97) Dated:- 15-11-2018 Madhya Pradesh SGST
GST – States
Madhya Pradesh SGST
Madhya Pradesh SGST
Commercial Tax Department
Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal
Bhopal, Dated 15th November, 2018
No. F.A-3-39-2018-1-V-(97).-In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 164 of the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (19 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:-
AMENDMENT
They shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from the 23rd October, 2017.
2. In the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, in rule 96, for sub-rule

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

The Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
F-A-3-38-2018-1-V-(98) Dated:- 15-11-2018 Madhya Pradesh SGST
GST – States
Madhya Pradesh SGST
Madhya Pradesh SGST
Commercial Tax Department
Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal
Bhopal, Dated 15th November, 2018
No. F.A-3-38-2018-1-V-(98).-In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (19 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:-
AMENDMENT
They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
2. In the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n 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 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 (10), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely:-
“(10) The persons claiming refund of integrated tax paid on exports of goods or services should not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Notifies the persons whose registration under the said Act has been cancelled by the proper officer on or before the 30th September, 2018 furnish the final return in Form GSTR-10 of the said rules till the 31st December, 2018.
F-A-3-42-2018-1-V-(95) Dated:- 15-11-2018 Madhya Pradesh SGST
GST – States
Madhya Pradesh SGST
Madhya Pradesh SGST
Commercial Tax Department
Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal
Bhopal, Dated 15th November, 2018
No. F.A-3-42-2018-1-V-(95).- In exercise of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

The Goa Goods and Services Tax (Thirteenth Amendment) Rules, 2018.
38/1/2017-Fin(R&C)(80) Dated:- 15-11-2018 Goa SGST
GST – States
Goa SGST
Goa SGST
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
Department of Finance
Revenue & Control Division
__
Notification
38/1/2017-Fin(R&C)(80)
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 (Thirteenth Amendment) Rules, 2018.
(2) They shall come into force with effect from the 30th day of October, 2018.
2. In the Goa Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the said rules), after rule 83, the following rule shall be inserted, namely:-
“83A. Examination of Goods and Services Tax Practitioners.- (1) Every person referred to in clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of rule 83 and who is enr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ion centers.- The examination shall be held across India at the designated centers. The candidate shall be given an option to choose from the list of centers as provided by NACIN at the time of registration.
(6) Period for passing the examination and number of attempts allowed.- (i) A person enrolled as a goods and services tax practitioner in terms of sub-rule (2) of rule 83 is required to pass the examination within two years of enrolment:
Provided that if a person is enrolled as a goods and services tax practitioner before 1st of July 2018, he shall get one more year to pass the examination:
Provided further that for a goods and services tax practitioner to whom the provisions of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of rule 83 apply, the period to pass the examination will be as specified in the second proviso of sub-rule (3) of said rule.
(ii) A person required to pass the examination may avail of any number of attempts but these attempts shall be within the period as specified in cla

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hall issue examination guidelines covering issues such as procedure of registration, payment of fee, nature of identity documents, provision of admit card, manner of reporting at the examination center, prohibition on possession of certain items in the examination center, procedure of making representation and the manner of its disposal.
(ii) Any person who is or has been found to be indulging in unfair means or practices shall be dealt in accordance with the provisions of sub-rule (10). An illustrative list of use of unfair means or practices by a person is as under:-
(a) obtaining support for his candidature by any means;
(b) impersonating;
(c) submitting fabricated documents;
(d) resorting to any unfair means or practices in connection with the examination or in connection with the result of the examination;
(e) found in possession of any paper, book, note or any other material, the use of which is not permitted in the examination center;
(f) communicating with others o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

satisfied with his result may represent in writing, clearly specifying the reasons therein to NACIN or the jurisdictional Commissioner as per the procedure established by NACIN on the official websites of the Board, NACIN and common portal.
(13) Power to relax.- Where the Board or State Tax Commissioner is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient to do so, it may, on the recommendations of the Council, relax any of the provisions of this rule with respect to any class or category of persons.
Explanation:- For the purposes of this sub-rule, the expressions-
(a) “jurisdictional Commissioner” means the Commissioner having jurisdiction over the place declared as address in the application for enrolment as the GST Practitioner in FORM GST PCT-1. It shall refer to the Commissioner of Central Tax if the enrolling authority in FORM GST PCT-1 has been selected as Centre, or the Commissioner of State Tax if the enrolling authority in FORM GST PCT-1 has been selected as State;
(b) N

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y:-
“142A. Procedure for recovery of dues under existing laws.- (1) A summary of order issued under any of the existing laws creating demand of tax, interest, penalty, fee or any other dues which becomes recoverable consequent to proceedings launched under the existing law before, on or after the appointed day shall, unless recovered under that law, be recovered under the Act and may be uploaded in FORM GST DRC-07A electronically on the common portal for recovery under the Act and the demand of the order shall be posted in Part II of Electronic Liability Register in FORM GST PMT-01.
(2) Where the demand of an order uploaded under sub-rule (1) is rectified or modified or quashed in any proceedings, including in appeal, review or revision, or the recovery is made under the existing laws, a summary thereof shall be uploaded on the common portal in FORM GST DRC-08A and Part II of Electronic Liability Register in FORM GST PMT-01 shall be updated accordingly.”.
4. In the said rules, in FO

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he effective date of surrender of registration falls or furnish an undertaking to the effect that no taxable supplies have been made during the intervening period (i.e. from the date of registration to the date of application for cancellation of registration).”.
5. In the said rules, in FORM GSTR-4, in the Instructions, for Sl. No. 10, the following shall be substituted, namely:-
“10. Information against the Serial 4A of Table 4 shall not be furnished.”.
6. In the said rules, for FORM GST PMT-01 relating to “Part II: Other than return related liabilities”, the following form shall be substituted, namely:-
“Form GST PMT-01
[See rule 85(1)]
Electronic Liability Register of Registered Person
(Part-II: Other than return related liabilities)
(To be maintained at the Common Portal)
Reference No.:-
GSTIN/Temporary Id-
Date:-
Name (Legal)-
Trade name, if any-
Period- From …to… (dd/mm/yyyy)
Stay status- Stayed/Un-stayed
Act – Central Tax/State Tax/UT Tax/Integrated

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ayable due to decision of appeal, rectification, revision, review etc. will be reflected here.
4. Negative balance can occur for a single Demand ID also if appeal is allowed/partly allowed. Overall closing balance may still be positive.
5. Refund of pre-deposit can be claimed for a particular demand ID if appeal is allowed even though the overall balance may still be positive subject to the adjustment of the refund against any liability by the proper officer.
6. The closing balance in this part shall not have any effect on filing of return.
7. Reduction in amount of penalty would be automatic if payment is made within the time specified in the Act or the rules.
8. Payment made against the show cause notice or any other payment made voluntarily shall be shown in the register at the time of making payment through credit or cash. Debit and credit entry will be created simultaneously.”.
7. In the said rules, in FORM GST APL-04, after serial number 9, and the Table relating thereto, t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r who has passed the order (optional)
15
Designation of the officer who has passed the order
16
Whether demand is stayed
ð Yes ð No
17
Date of stay order
18
Period of stay
From – to –
Part B – Demand details
19.
Details of demand created
(Amount in Rs. in all Tables)
Act
Tax
Interest
Penalty
Fee
Others
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Central Acts
State/UT Acts
CST Act
20.
Amount of demand paid under existing laws
Act
Tax
Interest
Penalty
Fee
Others
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Central Acts
State/UT Acts
CST Act
21.
(19-20)
Balance amount of demand proposed to be recovered under GST laws
<< Auto-populated >>
Act
Tax
Interest
Penalty
Fee
Others
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Central Acts
State/UT Acts
CST Act
Signature
Name
Designation
Jurisdiction
To
_______________ (GSTIN/ID)
_________________ Name
_______________ (Address)
Copy to:-
Note:-
1. In case of demands relating to short payment of tax declared in return, acknowledg

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ence No.
Date
Part A – Basic details
Sr. No.
Description
Particulars
(1)
(2)
(3)
1
GSTIN
2
Legal name
<>
3
Trade name, if any
<>
4
Reference No. vide which demand uploaded in FORM GST DRC-07A
5
Date of FORM GST DRC-07A vide which demand uploaded
6
Government Authority who passed the order creating the demand
ð State/UT ð Centre
<>
7
Old Registration No.
<< Auto, editable>>
8
Jurisdiction under earlier law
<>
9
Act under which demand has been created
<>
10
Tax period for which demand has been created
<>
11
Order No. (original)
<>
12
Order date (original)
<>
13
Latest order No.
<>
14
Latest order date
<>
15
Date of service of the order
<>
16
Name of the officer who has passed the order (optional)
<>
17
Designation of the officer who has passed the order
<

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Sakshi Enterprises Versus State of U.P. And 2 Others
GST
2018 (12) TMI 65 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 15-11-2018
Writ Tax No. – 1461 of 2018
GST
Pankaj Mithal And Ashok Kumar JJ.
For the Petitioner : Shubham Agrawal
For the Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
Heard Ms. Sanyukta Singh and Sri Subham Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned counsel appeared for the respondents.
The goods of the petitioner in tran

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Calcutta Ahmedabad Roadlines Private Limited Versus State Tax Officer, Kharagpur Range And Ors.
GST
2018 (12) TMI 1408 – CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 411 (Cal.)
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 15-11-2018
W. P. 21257 (W) of 2018
GST
Mr Debangsu Basak, J.
For The Petitioner : Mr. Arshat Agarwal And Mr. Shovan Ghosh
For The Respondent : Mr. Arshat Agarwal And Mr. Shovan Ghosh
ORDER
It is the contention of the petitioner that, it is not in a position to upload the appeal electronically.
Learned Advocate for the State submits that, the appeal can be filed manually also. He refers to Rule 97A and 107A of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The Rules of 2017 permit manual filing of appeal

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Oracle Financial Services Software Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai East
Service Tax
2018 (12) TMI 1426 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 15-11-2018
Appeal No. ST/86353/2018 – A/88143/2018
Service Tax
Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) And Mr. P. Anjani Kumar, Member (Technical)
Shri B. Raichandani, Advocate for appellant
Shri M. Suresh, Asst. Commr (AR) for respondent
ORDER
Per: S.K. Mohanty
This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 06.12.2017 passed by the Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai East.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in providing “Information Technology Software Service” and “Management, Maintenance or Repair Service”, defined as taxable services under the Finance Act, 1994. For providing such taxable services, the appellant got it registered with the Service Tax department. The appellant avails CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on the input services used for providing those output

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

pporting evidences were produced by the appellant to demonstrate that the disputed services can be considered as input service for the Cenvat benefit.
3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that although under the unamended definition of 'input service” (effective upto 31.03.2011) and the amended definition (with effect from 01.04.2011) the disputed services were clarified as 'input service' for the purposes of availment of Cenvat benefit. He further submits that since the disputed services were used / utilized for providing the output service and such services having been covered under the definition of input service as per the Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the benefit of credit shall not to be denied to the appellant. To support his stand that the disputed services are conforming to the definition of input service, the learned Advocate has relied upon the following decisions rendered by the judicial forums:-
(a) Axis Bank Ltd. v. CCE- 2017-TIOL 3867-Cesta

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

disputed services should be considered as input service in terms of Rule 2(l) of the Rules for the period upto 31.03.2011. Under the amended definition of Rule 2(l) (with effect from 01.04.2011), the assessee is permitted to avail credit on any service used for providing the output service, excepting the excluded category of services mentioned in the definition of input service. The description of disputed services provided in the impugned order, do not fall under the excluded category provided under Rule 2(l) of the Rules. Therefore, denial of Cenvat benefit on the disputed services on the ground that those services are not confirming to the definition of input service is not proper and justified. However, since the original authority had specifically recorded the findings that the appellant had not produced any documentary evidences to show nexus as well as the eligibility of Cenvat benefit on the disputed services, we are of the view that the matter should be remanded to the origina

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Council may have to take a view on the funding of NDRF – Shri N.K.Singh
GST
Dated:- 14-11-2018

GST Council may have to take a view on the funding of NDRF – Shri N.K.Singh
XVFC concludes International Workshop on Financing of Disaster Risk Management in India, urged to come up with a structure to make 'Disaster Mitigation' an integral part of development expenditure
XVFC concluded the International Workshop in India on Financing of Disaster Risk Management yesterday in New Delhi. The two-day conference discussed various issues related to Disaster Risk Management (DRM) ranging from urbanization, climate change, coastal erosion, localized catastrophes and the price associated with it, among many other issues. The ne

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

sues on which GST Council may have to take a view.
This is not only the issue of earmarking of funds for DRM but also to ensure that funds earmarked are used for DRM like in case of funds devolved to states on account of Forest cover. Deciding on conditionality for use of such funds is a tricky thing. Shri Subhash Chandra Garg, Secretary DEA in his closing remarks urged the Commission to come up with a structure to make Disaster Mitigation an integral part of development expenditure. We need to rethink about ways to finance flexible safety net for the people during stress, he said. Dr. P. K. Mishra said that issue in funding arises due to the different nature of mitigation activities (non-contingent) and relief activities (contingent needs

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

NDRF/SDRF is a key question. DRM needs are very diverse as they include relief, recovery, resilience, mitigation and therefore need careful consideration in decision making which in turn depends on availability of suitable data, analytical tools and replicable models. Experts agreed that any resilience model may be started in Pilot mode and then scaled up. Funds for DRM will require resources and investment not only from govt. but also from private sector, NGOs and civil society.
Participants including Ms. Fracine Pickup, Country Director, UNDP and Dr. Junaid Kamal, Country Director, World Bank India thanked the Chairman and members of the Commission for organizing the International Conference on DRM in India and bringing together ideas,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Include free tool costs in component valuation u/s 15 of CGST, SGST, IGST Act 2017.
Case-Laws
GST
Valuation of goods supplied – The amortised cost of tools which are re-supplied back to the a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Availing IGST credit
Query (Issue) Started By: – Chidambaram Subramaniam Dated:- 14-11-2018 Last Reply Date:- 2-12-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 6 Replies
GST
Dear Sir,
Our Company provide temporary accomodation to many of the outstation candidates at the time of joining the company through a vendor and the vendor charges IGST in all their invoices.
My Query is whether the company can avail credit of the IGST charged by the vendor for such nature of expenses.
Please guide us.
thanks and regards
Chidambaram
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Dear Querist,
Will such expenses form part of Profit & Loss Account in the Company's Annual Report/Balance Sheet ?
Reply By Chidambaram Subramaniam:
The Reply:
Dear Si

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Complete Analysis of Annual Return And GST Audit Under GST Law
By: – Sandeep Rawat
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 14-11-2018

Government has announced for annual return to be filed under Goods & Service tax Act. However a Lot of difficulties are being faced by taxpayers and professionals while filing GST returns due to technical glitches and ambiguous law. After filing monthly returns, a regular person has to even file an Annual Return which is quite detailed. it's critical to start focusing on various compliances such as input and output reconciliations, preparation and filing of annual return and GST audit certification.
Annual Return and GST Audit
GSTR-9 ANNUAL RETURN
GSTR 9 form is an annual return to be filed once in a year by the registered taxpayers under GST including those registered under composition levy scheme. It consists of details regarding the supplies made and received during the year under different tax heads i.e. CGST, SGST and IGST. It consol

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

upplies declared during the financial year(FY). This detail must be picked up by consolidating summary from all GST returns filed in previous FY.
* Part-III
Details of ITC declared in returns filed during the FY. This will be summarised values picked up from all the GST returns filed in previous FY.
* Part-IV
Details of tax paid as declared in returns filed during the FY.
* Part-V
Particulars of the transactions for the previous FY declared in returns of April to September of current FY or up to the date of filing of annual returns of previous FY whichever is earlier. Usually, the summary of amendment or omission entries belonging to previous FY but reported in Current FY would be segregated and declared here.
* Part-VI
Other Information comprising details of:
* -GST Demands and refunds,
* HSN wise summary information of the quantity of goods supplied and received with its corresponding Tax details against each HSN code,
* Late fees payable and paid details and
* Se

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d and file a copy of audited annual accounts and reconciliation statement of tax already paid and tax payable as per audited accounts along with GSTR 9C.
This form is to be prepared and audited by a chartered accountant or cost accountant. This statement is to be filled for every GSTIN separately and therefore there-can be several reports of GSTR-9C for same PAN.
This form is divided into mainly 2 parts-
PART-A: RECONCILIATION STATEMENT
The figures in the audited financial statements are at PAN level. Hence, the turnover, Tax paid and ITC earned on a particular GSTIN( or State/UT) must be pulled out from the audited accounts of the organisation as a whole.
The Reconciliation Statement is divided into five parts as follows:
Part-I: Basic details:
Consists of FY, GSTIN, Legal Name and Trade Name. The taxpayer must also mention if he is subject to audit under any other law
Part-II:
Reconciliation of turnover declared in the Audited Annual Financial Statement with turnover dec

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ith a breakup of eligible and ineligible ITC and reconciliation of the eligible ITC with that amount claimed as per GSTR 9. This declaration will be after considering the reversals of ITC claimed, if any.
Part-V: Auditor's recommendation on additional Liability due to non-reconciliation-
Here, the Auditor must report any tax liability identified through the reconciliation exercise and GST audit, pending for payment by the taxpayer. This can be non-reconciliation of turnover or ITC on account of :
* Amount paid for supplies not included in the Annual Returns(GSTR 9)
* Erroneous Refund to be paid back
* Other Outstanding demands to be settled
Lastly, the instructions to the format of GSTR-9C specify that an option will be given to taxpayers to settle taxes as recommended by the auditor at the end of the reconciliation statement.
PART-B: CERTIFICATION.
The GSTR-9C can be certified by the same CA who conducted the GST audit or it can be also certified by any other CA who did no

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

revise this return.
However, this fee cannot be more than 0.25% of total turnover in the respective state/union territory
There is no specific penalty prescribed in the GST Law for not getting the accounts audited by a Chartered Accountant or a Cost Accountant. Therefore, in terms of Section 125 of CGST Act, 2017, he shall be subjected to penalty up to ₹ 25,000/-.
MAJOR PROBLEM/ISSUE WHILE CARRRING OUT GST AUDIT
Major problem faced while carrying out GST audit for the financial year 2017-18
* HSN of inward supplies is required in the annual return GSTR 9 which was not needed while filing monthly GSTR 3B.
* Multiple audits under indirect tax laws: VAT audits and Service Tax audit may be required to be carried out for the first quarter and GST audit for the next three quarters;
* The difference in the annual return as per the books of accounts and GST data filed during the financial year.
* Segregated details of ITC availed are required as Inputs/Input services/ Capital

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Sidhi Vinayak Agencies And Another Versus State Of U.P. And 2 Others
GST
2018 (11) TMI 710 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 14-11-2018
Writ Tax No. – 1449 of 2018
GST
Pankaj Mithal And Ashok Kumar JJ.
For the Petitioner : Shubham Agrawal
For the Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
Heard Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents .
The petitioners are the selling and purchasing dealers of the goods in transit. The goods have been seized on account of the fact that a proper E-way bill was not accompanying the goods.
The submission of Sri Agrawal is that the E-way bill was generated on 2.11.2018 much before the inte

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s S.R. Sales Versus State Of U.P. And 2 Others
GST
2018 (11) TMI 711 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 409 (All.)
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 14-11-2018
Writ Tax No. – 1446 of 2018
GST
Pankaj Mithal And Ashok Kumar JJ.
For the Petitioner : Rahul Agarwal
For the Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents.
The petitioner has preferred this writ petit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Suryadev Alloys & Power Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer
Central Excise
2018 (11) TMI 739 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 14-11-2018
Appeal No. E/42092/2018 – Final Order No. 42882/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Ms. S. Sridevi, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of MS billets, TMT bars, etc. and are availing the facility of CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services. It was noticed that the appellants have availed CENVAT credit based on invoices issued by their head office as input service distributor wi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

. She submitted that the appellant had reversed the entire credit even before issuance of the show cause notice. The only violation alleged by the department is that the head office had distributed the credit without taking ISD registration. Since there is only one unit apart from the head office, the credit was distributed and therefore the appellant was under bonafide belief that they are eligible to avail the credit. Further, the installation of air-conditioners where only renovation of the premises and the appellant is eligible for credit. Even though the credit impugned in this appeal is eligible, the appellant has reversed the same and is not contesting on merits. That the penalty therefore may be set aside.
3. The ld. AR Shri L. Nan

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =