Regarding Territorial Jurisdiction of Appeallate Authority under GST

Regarding Territorial Jurisdiction of Appeallate Authority under GST
F.1(PS-ACCT-HQ)ESTT/CCT/18/933 Dated:- 12-10-2018 Rajasthan SGST
GST – States
GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHA
COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT
ORDER
No. F.1(PS-ACCT-HQ)ESTT/CCT/18/933
ORDER
Dated: 12.10.2018
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No. 9 of 2017), hereinafter referred as the said Act, read with rule 109A of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, in supersession of the order no. F. 1 (PS-ACCT-HQ)ESTT/CCT/18/818 dated 22.06.2018, the officers specified in column (3) of the table below are authorised to Act as “Appellate Authorities” as mentioned against them in colum

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Regarding Territorial Jurisdiction of Appeallate Authority under GST

Regarding Territorial Jurisdiction of Appeallate Authority under GST
F.1(PS-ACCT-HQ)ESTT/CCT/18/935 Dated:- 12-10-2018 Rajasthan SGST
GST – States
GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHA
COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT
ORDER
No. F.1(PS-ACCT-HQ)ESTT/CCT/18/935
ORDER
Dated: 12.10.2018
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No. 9 of 2017), hereinafter referred as the said Act, read with rule 109A of the Rajasthan Goods an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Rathi Steel And Power Ltd. Versus Principal Chief Commissioner Of Central Tax Meerut And 2 Others

M/s Rathi Steel And Power Ltd. Versus Principal Chief Commissioner Of Central Tax Meerut And 2 Others
GST
2018 (11) TMI 560 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 12-10-2018
WRIT TAX No. – 1369 of 2018
GST
Hon'ble Bharati Sapru and Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai, JJ.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mayank Krishna S Chandel
Counsel for Respondent :- Krishna Agarawal
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner wants to withdraw this petition.
The writ pet

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Hwashin Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer

M/s. Hwashin Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer
Central Excise
2018 (11) TMI 822 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 12-10-2018
Appeal No. E/40084/2018 – Final Order No. 42629/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Ms. K. Nancy, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri L. Nandakukmar, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
The appellant has filed the above appeal against the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) who has upheld the denial of CENVAT credit availed on rent-a-cab services during the period September 2009 to March 2010.
2. Brief facts are that the appellants are manufacturers of automobile parts and accessories and are availing

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

urpose of picking up and dropping of employees of the appellant's factory. She relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. Tata Auto Comp Systems Ltd. – 2012 (277) ELT 315 (Kar.) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Visteon Automotive Systems India Pvt. Ltd. – 2017-TIOL-57-HC-MAD-CX and also the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai Vs. Titan Industries Ltd. – 2018 (6) TMI 1076 – CESTAT CHENNAI in support of her argument.
4. The ld. AR Shri L. Nandakumar supported the findings in the impugned order.
5. After hearing both sides, I find that the period involved be

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Pravesha Industries Private Limited Unit II Versus Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad – GST

M/s Pravesha Industries Private Limited Unit II Versus Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad – GST
Central Excise
2018 (11) TMI 824 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI
CESTAT HYDERABAD – AT
Dated:- 12-10-2018
Appeal No. E/30283/2018 – A/31333/2018
Central Excise
Mr. M. V. Ravindran., Member (Judicial)
Shri R. Muralidhar, Advocate for the Appellant.
Shri Guna Ranjan, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent.
ORDER
Per: M. V. Ravindran.
This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. HYDEXCUS- 001-APP-067-17-18 dated 21.06.2017.
2. Heard both sides and perused the records.
3. The relevant facts of the case are the appellant is a manufacturer of excisable goods who exported goods manufactured by them and sought refund of the amount of CENVAT credit unutilized as admissible to them under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. One such application filed by them in respect of the goods exempted during the quarter January to March, 2014 for an amount of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ction 11BB of the Act, 44.
4. The appeal filed by the appellant before the First Appellate Authority is also rejected. Hence this appeal.
5. Learned Counsel after taking the bench through the entire case records, submits that the issue is now settled by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Repro India Limited Vs. Union of India [2009 (235) ELT 614]. It is his submission that there is no dispute as to the fact that they had manufactured the goods availed eligible for CENVAT credit and cleared the goods to SEZ unit. He would submit that all clearances made to SEZ unit has to be considered as export. He draws our attention to the CBEC Circular No. 1001/8/2015-CX8 dated 28.04.2015, wherein it has been clarified that supplies from DTA to SEZ would be treated as export and hence rebate is available. Accordingly, the entire value of exempted clearances made to SEZ has to be considered as exports.
6. Learned Departmental Representative reiterates the findings of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

redit of the amount of Central Excise duty paid on the inputs and consumed for manufacture of goods cleared to export. In the case in hand, the clearances affected by the appellant are only to SEZ unit and it has been settled by the various decisions of the Tribunal that clearances made to SEZ has to be considered as an export. If that be so, the question of refunding the Central Excise duty paid on the inputs which remain unaccumulated has to be held in favour of the appellant herein. In the facts and circumstances of the case, since the refund of the amount is only in respect of the CENVAT credit, and if the cash refund is not sanctioned, the CENVAT credit available to them is not being question, the same has to be given as a credit which the changed scenario consequent to GST brought into picture would not be possible.
10. Accordingly, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it has to be held that appellant is to be granted the refund of Rs. 1,58,945/- by way

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Re: M/s. Sandvik Asia Pvt. Ltd.

In Re: M/s. Sandvik Asia Pvt. Ltd.
GST
2018 (11) TMI 1348 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 683 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN – AAR
Dated:- 12-10-2018
AAR No. RAJ/AAR/2018-19/21
GST
NITIN WAPA AND HEMANT JAIN, MEMBER
Present for the applicant: Shri Nitin Vijayvargiya, (Authorised representative)
Note: Under Section 100 of the CGST/RGST Act 2017, an appeal against this ruling lies before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under section 99 of CGST/RGST Act 2017, within a period of 30 days from the date of service of this order.
The Issue raised by M/s. Sandvik Asia Pvt. Ltd. {hereinafter the applicant} is fit to pronounce advance ruling as it falls under ambit of the Section 97(2) (a)(e) and it is given as under:
a. Classification of any goods or services or both;
e. Determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services
Further, the applicant being a registered person,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y its overseas group entities which are imported by the customers into India.
1.2. With respect to after sales support, the Applicant provides maintenance services for the imported equipment which includes repair and replacement of parts and tools. The maintenance services are provided for the equipment post issuance of commissioning certificate. The maintenance services are rendered on the equipment for a specific period as agreed with the customer from the commencement of mining operations depending upon the number of hours the equipment are operational or the quantum of output ton produced by the equipment during the equipment life cycle.
1.3. In respect of the supply of part under the proposed agreements, the Applicant would supply parts falling under multiple GST rates such as 12%, 18%, 28%, etc.
1.4. The Applicant intends to execute an agreement for providing maintenance services to prospective customers for equipment located at various sites in the state of Rajasthan.
2. QUE

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

shall be the relevant place of supply and type of tax which needs to be discharged? (i.e. CGST & SGST or IGST).
3. THE APPLICANT's INTREPRETATION:-
a. As per Section 2 (30) of GST Act, “composite supply” means a supply made by a taxable person to a recipient consisting of two or more taxable supplies of goods or services or both, or any combination thereof, which are naturally bundled and supplied in conjunction with each other in the ordinary course of business, one of which is a principal supply.
b. As per Section 2 (74) of GST Act, “mixed supply” means two or more individual supplies of goods or services, or any combination thereof, made in conjunction with each other by a taxable person for a single price where such supply does not constitute a composite supply.
c. As per Section 2 (90) of GST Act, “principal supply” means the supply of goods or services winch constitutes the predominant element of a composite supply and to which any other supply forming part of that composite

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t the maintenance services are required to be performeg, accordingly, depending on the requirements for performing the services, the Applicant would be supplying goods or services which could vary on each equipment.
g. Thus, it is clear that the main activity performed by the Applicant would be in respect of providing maintenance services ensuring uninterrupted operation of equipment irrespective of the quantum of goods required for the said purpose.
h. Therefore, it could be said that the supply of spares or other goods for providing maintenance services would be incidental or ancillary to the repair or maintenance services to be provided under the agreement.
i. In order to classify any activity as a composite supply, it could be said that the following conditions are required to be fulfilled referring the definition under Section 2(30) of GST Act:
a) There should be two or more taxable supplies of goods or services or both;
b) The taxable supplies should be naturally bundled i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ble supplies should be naturally bundled in the ordinary course of business.
In order to understand whether any service is naturally bundled or not, it is important to refer to the Education Guide issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC”) now renamed as Central Board of Indirect Tax and Customs ('CBIC'). Para 9.2.4 of the Education Guide mentioned the following:
“Whether services are bundled in the ordinary course of business would depend upon the normal or frequent practices followed in the area of business to which services relate.”
The nature of the various services in a bundle of services will also help in determining whether the services are naturally bundled in the ordinary course of business. If the nature of services is such that one of the services is the main service and the other services combined with such service are in the nature of incidental or ancillary services which help in better enjoyment of a main service. Referring to the scope of work to be

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

in the agreement. Hence the quantum of goods used is not possible since it varies every time depending on the requirement of the equipment to ensure its guaranteed availability. Therefore the Applicant offers the maintenance services as a whole to its clients charging therein a fixed amount, on the basis of the time the equipment has been in operation or the output the equipment has produced.
iii. Single Price: As mentioned above, the Applicant provides these maintenance services as a single package which includes supply of goods and services. The pricing of these services is also fixed on the basis of the time the equipment is in operation or the quantum of output produced by the equipment. Hence, the quantum of goods consumed in providing these services would be irrelevant in respect of the price to be charged to the customers by the Applicant. Further, as discussed earlier, the Applicant may not be able to predict the type of goods that may be required for the maintenance of the eq

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Oxford dictionary has been “Conjunction: The action or an instance of two or more events or things occurring at the same point in time or space”
In the instant case, the supply of goods or services or both shall be occurring together or at the same point of time as the sole intention of the agreements is to ensure that the equipment is operating without any interruptions. Hence, it could be said that the supply of goods or services would be done by the Applicant in conjunction with each other.
d) One taxable supply should be a principal supply
The definition of principal supply states that the supply which constitutes the predominant element of a composite supply and to which the other supply is ancillary shall be the principal supply.
As the provision of maintenance services under the said agreements is with the objective to ensure smooth and uninterrupted operation of the equipment. Thus, the activity of providing maintenance and repair service would constitute the predominant e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

g in case of M/S GE Diesel Locomotive Private Limited vide order dated 16.05.2018 held that comprehensive maintenance services in relation to railway locomotives are a composite supply of maintenance services.
4. PERSONAL HEARING (PH)
4.1 In the matter personal hearing was given to the applicant on 08/ 10/2018 wherein Sh. Nitin Vijayvargiya, Authorised representative (AR) appeared on behalf of the Applicant. During the PH the AR reiterated the submissions already made in the application for advance ruling and requested that the case may be decided at the earliest.
4.2 The jurisdictional officer in his comments has submitted that “the said supply is a mixed supply. As per Section 2 (74) of GST Act, “mixed supply” means two or more individual supplies of goods or services, or any combination thereof, made in conjunction with each other by a taxable person for a single price where such supply does not constitute a composite supply. Under Section 2 (74) of GST Act, the applicable GST fo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y them. The machinery supplied in 2017 also requires maintenance and further supply of its parts by the applicant. We also find that the applicant also makes an integrated contract for the operation and maintenance service and they are not in a position to ascertain which parts are to be supplied in the course of its operation and maintenance. In these two situations the question raised by the applicant is that Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the maintenance services rendered on customers' equipment under the two agreements i.e. comprehensive maintenance services agreement and supply of parts and services agreement which also includes supply and replacement of spare parts should be classified as 'composite supply' under Section 2(30) of Central Goods and Service tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) and Rajasthan State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (RJ SGST Act) [collectively referred to as the 'GST Act'] or as mixed supply under Section 2(74) of GSTAct?
5.2 We find that Integrat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, also shows that in their daily/ monthly logsheet the applicant has to mention the parts being replaced by them. It is evident that the applicant can supply these parts individually and along with the package of the services. Supply of parts and services are known and can be supplied individually to the customers, hence, these supplies fall under the services specified under Section 2(74) of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017 and they are chargeable to GST at applicable rates such as 12%, 18%, 28%, etc. whichever is higher.
5.4 As per Section 2 (74) of GST Act, “mixed supply” means two or more individual supplies of goods or services, or any combination thereof, made in conjunction with each other by a taxable person for a single price where such supply does not constitute a composite supply.
5.5 In the present case the applicant can supply the parts or services individually or any combination thereof on a single price which is appropriately covered under mixed supply.
5.6 However, the conten

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

operation and maintenance services. In the present case, main issue is to ensure the uninterrupted operation of the equipment through supply of maintenance services. For the provision of such services, the Applicant has to supply certain goods such as spare parts and consumables, and would also supply maintenance services through skilled engineers, labourers etc.
5.9 The consumption of goods vary substantially depending on the wear and tear of the equipment, however the consumption of services which would be critical may not vary substantially as these engineers would be stationed at the mine site and accordingly perform maintenance activities on the equipment at regular intervals. Therefore, the predominant element in the composite supply would be provision of maintenance services and the supply of goods would be ancillary to such services.
5.10 Accordingly, the supply of maintenance services should be considered as the principal supply and the supply of other goods or services shal

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ather production, machinery for paper and paperboard production, weapons and weapons systems, agricultural, forestry and garden tractors and lawnmowers, other general-purpose machinery and special- purpose machinery.
This service code does not include:
* maintenance and repair services of domestic boilers and bunters, cf 995463 and
* elevators, goods lifts, escalators and moving pavements, cf 998718
5.12 Thus, the service code for Maintenance and repair services of commercial and industrial machinery is 9987171 and the prescribed rate of GST is (CGST @ 9% of the taxable value, SGST @ 9% of the taxable value) or IGST @ 18% of the taxable value.
5.13 For the supply of mixed services, the applicant is liable to pay the highest rate of tax as per Section 8(b) of the CGST Act, 2017. Section8(b) of the CGST act is as below:
“a mixed supply comprising two or more supplies shall be treated as a supply of that particular supply which attracts the highest rate of tax.”
Question 4
5.13

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

7 and determination of place of supply has not been specified under Section 97 (2). In view of above we are not giving any finding in respect of place of supply. Hence the query raised by the applicant is accordingly disposed off.
6. In view of the above stated facts we pronounce the ruling as under:-
RULING
1. The activities performed under the 'Comprehensive Maintenance Contract' are to be treated as a composite supply of services and the activities performed under 'Equipment Parts Supply and Services Agreement' are to be treated as Mixed Supply.
2. In respect of the activities performed under 'Comprehensive Maintenance Contract', the supply of Operation & Maintenance services is the principal supply and the supply of other services are ancillary to such principal supply.
3. The service code for Maintenance and repair services of commercial and industrial machinery is 9987171 and the prescribed rate of GST is 18% (CGST @ 9% of the taxable value, SGST @ 9% of the taxable value) o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Ambition Institute Versus Commissioner, CGST, Rohtak

M/s. Ambition Institute Versus Commissioner, CGST, Rohtak
Service Tax
2018 (11) TMI 1522 – CESTAT CHANDIGARH – TMI
CESTAT CHANDIGARH – AT
Dated:- 12-10-2018
Appeal No.ST/60907/2018 – A/63318/2018-SM[BR]
Service Tax
Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
Present for the Appellant: Shri Naveen Bindal, Advocate
Present for the Respondent: Shri A.K. Saini, AR
ORDER
PER: ASHOK JINDAL
The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand has been confirmed on the basis of income surrender before the Income-Tax Department.
2. The facts of the case are that on the basis of information that Income-Tax Department conducted a survey of the appellant on 28.8.2012 where the appellant surrendered a substanti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

icated, the demand of service tax was confirmed along with interest and imposed penalties on them. Against this order, the appellant is before me.
3. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the burden lies on the Revenue to establish that while providing taxable service the appellant earned the amount surrendered to the Income-Tax Department. In the absence of the same, the demand of service tax cannot be confirmed in view of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Garg Furnace Limited vs. CCE, Ludhiana vide Final Order No.62434/2018 dt.1.6.2018. Therefore, the impugned order is to be set aside.
4. On the other hand, Ld. AR reiterated the findings in the impugned of the Commissioner (Appeals).
5. Heard the parties.
6. Consi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

assessee. As the appellant has failed to come with evidence that the said amount surrendered with the Income Tax Department is on account clandestine removal of goods. In that circumstance, demand against the appellant cannot be confirmed in the light of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Vardhman Chemtech Limited and others vide Final Order No.A/60931-60932/2016-EX (DB) dated 11.7.2016, therefore, the impugned order is set aside. In the result, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief.”
7. I hold that the demand on account of income surrendered with the Income Tax Department cannot be confirmed against the appellant.
8. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential rel

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

IN RE: M/s. SIR J.J. COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANCY CELL

IN RE: M/s. SIR J.J. COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANCY CELL
GST
2018 (12) TMI 894 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – 2019 (21) G. S. T. L. 198 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – AAR
Dated:- 12-10-2018
GST-ARA-54/2018-19/B-128
GST
SHRI B.V. BORHADE, AND SHRI PANKAJ KUMAR, MEMBER
PROCEEDINGS
(Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
The present application has been filed under section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and Act”] by SIR J.J. COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE CONSULTANCY CELL, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following issue:
Whether applicant shall charge GST on the consultancy services rendered to Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) for an upcoming project of establishment & development of texti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

.
b. JJ provides services to only to Government bodies, State corporations and PSUs in relation to comprehensive architecture services that include project design, structural design, MEP design, drawings, study reports, etc.
c. Currently, JJ has entered into an agreement with Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) for an upcoming project of establishment & development of 'textile Museum' in Mumbai where JJ has to provide comprehensive Architecture service and project management service that includes architecture service and MEP design, reviewing tender document for inviting contractors, site supervision and certifying bills of contractors paid by MCGM. This project involves heritage restoration and adoptive reuse of various structures such as Textile Museum, Library bldg., back office for support staff, shopping area which would be leased out to various state government authorities for showcase of textiles, Auditorium, underground parking, Public Plaza – Landscape area, etc

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nment authority. The relevant entry is reproduced as below – Pure Service (excluding works contract service or other composite supplies involving supply of any goods) provided to central government, state government or union authority or local authority or a government authority by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to panchayat under article 243G of the constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a municipality under article 243W of the constitution.
b. This entry provides exemption from payment of taxes on pure services (excluding works contract service or other composite supplies involving supply of any goods) provided to central government, state government or union authority or local authority or a government authority by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to panchayat under article 243G of the constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a municipality under article 243W of the constitution.
c. In order to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of M/S. Sir. J.J. College of Architecture Consultancy Cell as under
Question : Whether applicant shall charge GST on the consultancy services rendered to Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) for an upcoming project of establishment and development of Textile museum in Mumbai.
Reply: YES
Comments: Exemption provided as per notification no. 12/2017- Central tax rate dt. 28-06-2017 -exemption provided for pure Services (excluding Works Contract service or other Composite supplies involving supply of any goods) provided to the Central government, State Government or Union Territory or Local authority or a Government authority by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G of the Constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution.
Agreement made between J.J. College of Architecture Consultancy cell and Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) is under Article 63/

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

h. Shrikant Biwalkar, State Tax Officer (C-602), Nodal division – 1, Mumbai appeared and stated that they have already made submissions.
05. OBSERVATIONS
We have gone through the facts of the case, written and oral submissions as made by the applicant as well as the concerned officer and the applicable legal provisions of the case.
We find that the applicant, Sir J. J, College of Architecture is an institution of repute, located in Mumbai.
We find that the Architecture Consultancy Cell of the applicant college has entered in to an agreement with the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) to provide comprehensive architecture service and project management service that includes architecture service and MEP design, reviewing tender documents for inviting contractors, site supervision and certifying bills of contractors, paid by MCGM in respect of an upcoming project of establishment and Development of a 'Textile Museum' in Mumbai. The project involves heritage restoration an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ing works contract service or other composite supplies involving supply of any goods) provided to the Central Government, State Government or Union Territory or local authority or a Governmental authority by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under Article 243G of the Constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under Article 243W of the Constitution
NIL
NIL
In continuation to the above, we also find that the applicant in their ARA have stated that Establishment and Development of a museum and recreation ground is not considered as a function entrusted to a Municipality under Article 243 of the Constitution. Since Establishment and Development of a museum and recreation ground is not a function listed in in the 12th Schedule to be read with Article 243 of the Constitution, the applicant has stated that in their view JJ is required to charge GST on consultancy services rendered to MCGM for the above project work, under

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Municipalities, subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, with respect to-
(i) the preparation of plans for economic development and social justice;
(ii) the performance of functions and the implementation of schemes as may be entrusted to them including those in relation to the matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule;
(b) the Committees with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to carry out the responsibilities conferred upon them including those in relation to the matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule.
We further find that the Twelfth Schedule (Article 243W of the Constitution (Seventy-Fourth Amendment) Act, 1992) reads as under:
1. Urban planning including town planning.
2. Planning of land- use and construction of buildings.
3. Planning for economic and social development.
4. Roads and bridges.
5. Water supply for domestic, industrial and commercial purposes.
6. Public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

17-CT(Rate) dated 28.06.2018, we first of all examine the exact nature of services being provided by the applicant to MCGM.
We find that the applicant in their submissions have details of the activities to be undertaken by them as under:-
“Currently, JJ has entered into an agreement with Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) for an upcoming project of establishment & development of 'textile Museum' in Mumbai where JJ has to provide comprehensive Architecture service and project management service that includes architecture service and MEP design, reviewing tender document for inviting contractors, site supervision and certifying bills of contractors paid by MCGM. This project involves heritage restoration and adoptive reuse of various structures such as Textile Museum, Library bldg., back office for support staff, shopping area which would be leased out to various state government authorities for showcase of textiles, Auditorium, underground parking, Public Plaza – Landscape

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t, we are constrained to find that the services being provided by the applicant to MCGM are in the nature of Works Contract Services and therefore they would in no way be eligible for exemption under Sr. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2018, in respect of pure services.
In view of submissions made by the jurisdictional officer and registration of agreement between the applicant and MCGM as works Contract Agreement as per advice of MCGM and as a result themselves stating that of the services provided by the applicant to be of the nature of Works Contract Services, we do not find the need to go into their other agreements in respect of claims of exemption under Sr.No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-CT(Rate) dated 28.06.2018, as pure services.
05. In view of the extensive deliberations as held hereinabove, we pass an order as follows :
ORDER
(Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
N

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Classic Construction Company Versus Commissioner, GST, Panchkula

Classic Construction Company Versus Commissioner, GST, Panchkula
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1405 – CESTAT CHANDIGARH – 2019 (21) G. S. T. L. 444 (Tri. Chan.)
CESTAT CHANDIGARH – AT
Dated:- 12-10-2018
Appeal No. ST/60551/2018 – FINAL ORDER NO. 63351/2018
Service Tax
Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
For The Appellant : Shri Vikash Bansal, CA
For The Respondent : Shri M.S.Dhindsa, AR
ORDER
PER: ASHOK JINDAL
The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim has been rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals).
2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a contractor providing construction services to Housing Board Haryana (HBH). The Housing Board Haryana deducted service tax from the r

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Gurugram, therefore, the refund claim is required to be filed there. Therefore, they are not entitled to claim refund from the Panchkula office. Against this order, the appellant is before me.
3. Ld. Consultant appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that on account of rejection of refund claim by either of the Gurugram Commissionerate and Panchkula Commissionerate as they have filed refund claim under the jurisdiction of Panchkula, the same cannot be rejected by the Commissioner (appeals) as the service tax has been paid by the Housing Board Haryana and not by the appellant. The Housing Board Haryana deducted service tax from the running bills of the appellant and they have borne the service tax themselves, therefore, they are entitl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ionerate, then the appellant is having jurisdiction to file refund with the Panchkula Commissionerate. Therefore, they have rightly filed refund claim before the Panchkula Commissionerate. Further, I find that the appellant has produced certificate from the Housing Board Haryana certifying that the appellant can file refund of service tax paid by Housing Board Haryana and the service tax borne by the appellant. In that circumstance, I hold that the appellant is entitled to file refund claim before the Panchkula Commissionerate. Therefore, the concerned officer of Panchkula Commissionerate is directed to sanction the refund claim to the appellant within 30 days of receipt of this order.
7. The appeal is allowed in the above terms.
(dictate

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Credit allowability in case of Builders

Credit allowability in case of Builders
Query (Issue) Started By: – ROHIT GOEL Dated:- 11-10-2018 Last Reply Date:- 17-1-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
One of our client (assessee company) is engaged in the activity of building and developing commercial complex. Out of shops constructed therein some shops were sold out while construction on which service tax has been paid in full and some were sold after date of project completion on which no service tax has bee

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Special Drive Fortnight Launched to Resolve IGST Refund Errors and Enhance Tax Administration Efficiency.

Special Drive Fortnight Launched to Resolve IGST Refund Errors and Enhance Tax Administration Efficiency.
Circulars
Customs
Special Drive Fortnight to rectify errors relating to IGST refunds.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Composition GSTR4 Return

Composition GSTR4 Return
Query (Issue) Started By: – Ravikumar Doddi Dated:- 11-10-2018 Last Reply Date:- 11-10-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
Dear sir,
Is it mandatory to file invoice wise details registered inward as mentioned table 4A , there are 17 points to answer to open the Form GSTR-4. Table 6 showing rate of tax wise outward viz., 0%,5%,2% and 1%, Where to mention the GST exempted/nil rated outward where there is no column, only '0' rated was m

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ANTI-PROFITEERING CHARGES ON TAX RATE DEDUCTION

ANTI-PROFITEERING CHARGES ON TAX RATE DEDUCTION
By: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 11-10-2018

In one of the recent cases, In Re: Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 9 TMI 1640 (NAA), National Anti-Profiteering Authority vide its order dated 25.09.2018 has confirmed Anti-profiteering charges on sale of goods and penalty imposed.
In the instant case, the applicant alleged that the respondent had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax by lowering the price of 'Maybelline FIT Me foundation' (product), which she had purchased, when the Goods and Services Tax (GST) was reduced from 28% to 18% on this product on 15.11.2017. She had also alleged that she had bought the above product from the Respondent @ ₹ 525/- per unit vide tax invoice, which included GST @ 18%. She had also claimed that the Respondent had indulged in profiteering in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 and hence approp

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

l he was liable to revise his retail selling price as he had taken the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the purchase of the product, therefore he was required to reduce the Retail Selling Price (RSP) to pass on the benefit of reduction in the rate of GST from 28% to 18% w.e.f. 15.11.2017 to his customers. It was also found by the DGAP that earlier the MRP of the product was ₹ 550/- which was revised to ₹ 575/- post 20.06.2017 and the RSP of the product was decided by the Respondent within the MRP which was printed on the back of the product.
The Authority observed and concluded that the Respondent had enhanced the basic price of both the shades of the product which was exactly equal to the amount by which the GST on them had been reduced and hence there is no doubt that the Respondent had resorted to profiteering amounting to ₹ 15,861/- which includes profiteering of ₹ 41/- made by him from the Applicant, which constitutes violation of the provisions of Sec

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

visited penalty.
Accordingly, the Respondent was directed to reduce the price of both the shades of the product to ₹ 410/- and ₹ 449/- respectively excluding GST. He was also directed to refund an amount of ₹ 41/- along with interest @ 18% to the Applicant No. 1 from the date when this amount was realised by him from her till the date of refund. Since rest of the recipients were not identifiable, the DGAP was directed to get the balance amount of profiteering of ₹ 15,820/- deposited in the Consumer Welfare Fund of the Central and the Concerned State Govt. as per the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (c) of the CGST Rules, 2017 along with interest @ 18% till the amount is paid. Any amount ordered to be refunded or to be deposited shall be refunded or deposited within a period of 3 months by the Respondent from the date of receipt of this order failing which the same shall be recovered by the DGAP as per the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and shall be refunded or dep

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Maggi – the 10th case for National Anti-Profiteering Authority

Maggi – the 10th case for National Anti-Profiteering Authority
By: – Prasanna CP
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 11-10-2018

SHRI ANKUR JAIN, DIRECTOR GENERAL ANTI-PROFITEERING, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS, VERSUS M/S. KUNJ LUB MARKETING PVT. LTD. [ 2018 (10) TMI 510 – NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY ]
The National Anti-Profiteering Authority has issued several order in the consumer sector addressing issues with respect to passing the benefits of reduction in GST rates to consumer by way commensurate reduction in selling price. Let us discuss about the recent order issued by the authority on sale of Maggi.
Background of the case:
A consumer has purchased Maggi Noodle packs, each weighing 35 grams having MRP of ₹ 5 from the seller. Prior to 15.11.2017, the seller was charging 18% GST on the product's base price of ₹ 3.96 per pack, however, after the GST rate was reduced from 18% to 12% with effect from 15.11.2017, the Seller had st

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of GST rate reduction in respect of the product bearing MRP of ₹ 5 through other packs of Maggi Noodles having different basic weights. The Respondent had further submitted that in the case of the product the price reduction would have been around 21 paise to the retailer and around 25 paise to the ultimate consumer which would have been inconvenient to both the retailer and the consumer due to legal tender issue, whereas on Maggi Noodles pack of 70 grams bearing MRP of ₹ 12 per pack, the benefit on account of GST rate reduction for the retailer would have been approximately 56 paise against which the respondent had reduced the price by 92 paise with reduced MRP of ₹ 11 and thus, the benefit in respect of ₹ 5 MRP pack had been passed on by reducing the price of other packs of Maggi Noodles by more than what was required. Therefore, the Respondent had claimed that the benefit of GST rate reduction had been passed on in respect of Maggie Noodles as a whole.
Abse

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

uct or not?
2) Whether there was any violation of the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 in this case? If yes, then what was the quantum of profiteering?
After careful examination of DGAP's report and submissions from both applicant and respondent, the following observations were made by the Anti-Profiteering Authority.
Product of concern
MRP per pack
Period of sales: 1st Nov to
14th Nov 2017
Period of sales: 15th Nov 2017
to 28th Feb 2018
Amount charged
Base price
GST rate
Amount charged
Base price
GST rate
Maggi 35 grams
5
4.67
3.96
18%
4.67
4.17
12%
* The respondent is required to reduce the MRP of the product by taking into effect of the reduction in rate of tax. The respondent further required to fix the MRP as per the provisions of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011.
* As per rule 2(m) “retail sale price” means the maximum price at which the commodity in packaged form may be sold to consumer and the price shall be print

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

er cannot be given or denied to another nor can the benefit given to one set of customers arbitrarily enhanced and set off against the another.
* Based on the perusal of the facts and sales figures it is clear that the respondent has not passed on the benefits of reduction in the GST rates to the consumers by way of commensurate reduction in prices, since the actual buyers of product Maggi 35 grams doesn't get reduced price benefit. This amounts to violation of section 171 of the CGST act, 2017.
* With reference to the above observations the quantum of profiteering for the period of concern 15th November to 28th Feb 2018 is computed as follows:
Qty Sold
Amount charged
Commensurate price per unit
Profiteering per unit
Total profiteering
382,048
₹4.67
₹4.43
₹0.24
₹91,692
Order:
The National Anti-Profiteering Authority vide order no. 10 dated 9th October directed the respondent (retail seller Kunj Lub Marketing Private Limited) to settle/deposit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Rates Differ: Government Works Contracts at 12%, Biotech Lab Construction by Company in Trivandrum at 18.

GST Rates Differ: Government Works Contracts at 12%, Biotech Lab Construction by Company in Trivandrum at 18.
Case-Laws
GST
Supply of works contracts awarded by Government attracts 12% GST. –

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST ITC on Land Development: Reverse Pro Rata for Plots Sold Post-Completion Certificate.

GST ITC on Land Development: Reverse Pro Rata for Plots Sold Post-Completion Certificate.
Case-Laws
GST
ITC – construction services – The Input Tax Credit availed in respect of the GST paid o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Applies to Hospital Medical Instrument Placements: Supply Classification and Right to Use Goods Transfer Discussed.

GST Applies to Hospital Medical Instrument Placements: Supply Classification and Right to Use Goods Transfer Discussed.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – Supply or not? – naturally bundled services

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Intermediary Services Under GST: Classification Includes Facilitating Supply of Goods, Affecting Tax Implications for Providers.

Intermediary Services Under GST: Classification Includes Facilitating Supply of Goods, Affecting Tax Implications for Providers.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification of service – Intermediary Services or not – The contract of services supplied are not pure and mere promotion and marketing services and the services provided is of the nature of facilitating the supply of goods, and hence would amount to “intermediary services”
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, ne

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Small Business Exemption u/s 22 of GST Act Applies Individually to Co-Owners of Jointly Owned Property.

Small Business Exemption u/s 22 of GST Act Applies Individually to Co-Owners of Jointly Owned Property.
Case-Laws
GST
Renting of immovable property service – Small Business Exemption – Co-own

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

E-WAY BILL

E-WAY BILL
Query (Issue) Started By: – Rishabh Mishra Dated:- 11-10-2018 Last Reply Date:- 12-10-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Sir,
I want to send some material directly from my purchasing party in Dadra Nagar Haveli to another party in Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. Party in Dadra Nagar haveli generated a e-way bill to Party in Gwalior. Do we have to generate a E-way bill?
What to be done in such circumstances.
Reply By SHIVKUMAR SHARMA:
The Reply:
Your Supplier from DNH can genereted an E Way bill as under:
Bill to Your Name & Ship to -Your Customer Name of Gwalior.
You need not to generate E way bill.
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani:
The Reply:
Agreed, supplier in Dadra and Nagar Haveli shall bill on you bu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y:
* 'A' is the person who has ordered 'B' to send goods directly to 'C'.
* 'B' is the person who is sending goods directly to 'C' on behalf of 'A'.
* 'C' is the recipient of goods.
2. In this complete scenario two supplies are involved and accordingly two tax invoices are required to be issued:
* Invoice -1, which would be issued by 'B' to 'A'.
* Invoice -2 which would be issued by 'A' to 'C'.
3. Queries have been raised as to who would generate the e-Way Bill for the movement of goods which is taking place from 'B' to 'C' on behalf of 'A'. It is clarified that as per the CGST Rules, 2017 either 'A' or &

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d to be filled
Case -2: Where e-Way Bill is generated by 'A', the following fields shall be filled in Part A of GST FORM EWB-01:
1. Bill From: In this field details of 'A' are supposed to be filled.
2. Dispatch From: This is the place from where goods are actually dispatched. It may be the principal or additional place of business of 'B'.
3. Bill To: In this field details of 'C' are supposed to be filled.
4. Ship to: In this field address of 'C' is supposed to be filled.
5. Invoice Details: Details of Invoice-2 are supposed to be filled."
Regards
Nitika Jindal
9999804960
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani:
The Reply:
Agreed with the views expressed by Ms. Nikita , an expert.
Discussion

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer

M/s. Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer
Central Excise
2018 (10) TMI 696 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 11-10-2018
E/41589/2018 – 42584/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
For the Appellant : Ms. Krithika Jaganathan , Advocate
For the Respondent : Shri R. Subramaniam, AC (AR)
ORDER
Brief facts are that the appellants who are engaged in manufacture of aerated water without containing sugar, aerated water and sweetening beverage etc. were also availing the facility of CENVAT credit of duty paid on inputs, capital goods and service tax paid on input service. During the course of audit and scrutiny of the credit availed, it was noticed that the appellants had availed CENVAT credit of Rs. 11,48,094/- vide sl. No. 52 in the CENVAT account register for the month of July 2014 without any supporting documents as prescribed under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The appellants

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

inadvertently mentioned higher amount of Rs. 11,84,033/- as CENVAT credit utilizing for paying excise duty and disclosing in their ER-1 returns, though they had adjusted only lesser amount for payment of duty. She explained the calculation / error as given in the Table below:
S. No.
Particulars
Amount (July 2012)
Amount (November 2012)
1.
Excise duty liability (A)
1,62,96,444
1,42,32,775
2.
Amount paid through cash (B)
95,50,000
45,00,000
3.
Amount paid through CENVAT credit (C)
73,99,642
1,02,63,610
4.
Excess CENVAT credit shown as adjusted inadvertently (D) = (A) – (B) – (C)
6,53,198/-
5,30,835/-
 
Total credit shown as utilized
11,84,033/-
2.1 That only during internal verification done in July 2014, the mistake came to light and the appellant then took recredit of the excess CENVAT credit shown to have been utilized by the appellant incorrectly. The amounts were not actually utilized against payment of excise duty and the entry of adjustment / debit wa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

o moto credit by the assessee. She also relied upon the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of ICMC Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2014 (302) ELT 45 (Mad.) and argued that suo moto credit involves only an account entry reversal and there being no outflow of funds, it is not required to file refund claim.
3. The ld. AR Shri R.Subramaniam supported the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that when the appellants have availed the credit by suo moto recredit, the same is ineligible because, credit is not availed on any supporting documents as prescribed under Rule 9 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Further, if any excess duty has been paid, the only remedy available is to file refund claim. The appellant instead of filing refund claim has taken suo moto credit to circumvent the limitation prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. He emphasized that there is no procedure for taking suo moto credit under the Act.
4. Heard bot

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y the assessee later. Further, the jurisdictional High court in the case of ICMC Corporation Ltd. (supra) had occasion to analyse the very same and has held as under:-
“13. We do not subscribe to the view expressed by the Revenue. Admittedly, the assessee originally availed the Cenvat credit on Service Tax for discharging its liability.
However, for sound reasons, it reversed the credit. Strictly speaking, in this process, there is only an account entry reversal and factually there is no outflow of funds from the assessee to result in filing application under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 claiming refund of duty. The contention of the Revenue that even in reversal of the entry there is bound to be an unjust enrichment has no substance or based on any legal principle, since, what is availed off by the assessee is only a credit on the duty paid on the services rendered. Further, the assessee is entitled to take note of as per Rule 6(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

J.K. Tyre & Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Outer Commissionerate

J.K. Tyre & Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Outer Commissionerate
Central Excise
2018 (10) TMI 697 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 11-10-2018
E/41550/2018 – 42582/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial)
For the Appellant : Shri Sai Prasanth, Advocate
For the Respondent : Shri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR)
ORDER
The brief facts of the case are that appellants are engaged in manufacture of tyres, tubes and flaps. They are selling the manufactured goods, through their depots / dealers located all over India at the net dealer price since the quantum of various discounts are not known at the time of clearance they requested for provisional assessment under Rule 7 of Central Excise Rules 2002 for the period from October 2012 to December 2012 and from January 2013 to March 2013.
The provisional assessment was finalised vide Order-in-Original No.71/2013 (Prov. Ass.) dated 23.12.2013. The short pai

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e OIO No. 13/2017-RF and the refund was sanctioned but the original authority again directed to credit the amount to the Consumer Welfare Fund. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) again upheld such order. Thus appellants are once again before the Tribunal.
2. On behalf of the appellant, Ld.Counsel Shri Sai Prasanth appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that vide order of finalization of provisional assessment the excess amount of Rs. 22,98,934/- (Rs.23,40,314 (-) Rs. 41,380) was ordered to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund on the ground that the amount has not passed the test of unjust enrichment. He submitted that it is settled that duty short paid and duty excess paid during the provisional assessment can be adjusted against each other; that it is also settled law that test of unjust enrichment is not applicable for the purpose of such adjustment. He relies upon the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Toyota Kirloskar Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd. Vs CC

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

unt after such adjustment. In Toyota Kirloskar Auto Parts stated (supra) the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka had occasion to analyse the issue and has held that such adjustment is permissible. The relevant portion of the Hon'ble High Court order is reproduced as under :
“8. Therefore, it is clear that after a final assessment order is passed, if the duty paid in terms of provisional assessment is less than the duty payable after the final assessment, the assessee is liable to pay the interest on the short fall. In the entire scheme of Rule 7, there is no indication that when an assessee is permitted to pay duty in pursuance of a provisional assessment order, if he is dealing with more than one goods, they have to be treated separately. Even though the duty payable under the Act is to be calculated under each head of each case ultimately it is the total duty payable for all the goods which are the subject matter of the provisional assessment and final assessment which is to be taken i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Mars Plywood Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST & CX

M/s. Mars Plywood Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST & CX
Central Excise
2018 (10) TMI 833 – CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – TMI
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 11-10-2018
CEXA 55 of 2018, GA 825 of 2018, GA 826 of 2018
Central Excise
I. P. MUKERJI AND AMRITA SINHA JJ.
Appearance:
Mr. P. K. Das, Adv. Mr. C. K. Dutta, Adv. Mr. Rohan Sengupta, Adv. For the appellant
Mr. Somnath Ganguli, Adv. Mr. Sudipta Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Sabnam Basu, Adv. For the respondent
Re : GA 825 of 2018
The Court: Sufficient cause is shown. The delay in preferring the appeal is condoned. Let this appeal be registered by the department forthwith.
The application (GA 825 of 2018) is allowed.
Re: GA 826 of 2018, CEXA 55 of 2018:
This is an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of Rs. 2, 45, 850.09/- along with interest and penalty of Rs. 4, 00, 292.00/- has been wrongly imposed on the appellant by the respondent authority by rejecting their argument that this stock of unlabelled and unstamped plywood was to be entered in the Daily Stock Account and accounted for.
Mr. Das said that according to the respondent such entry should be ignored and was ignored by them.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Commissioner submitted that at all stages of the proceeding, the adjudicating bodies have come to the conclusion that the appellant was guilty of clandestine removal of the goods for the purpose of evasion of duty.
On a bare perusal of the records of this case, we find that there was a stock of unlabelled an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

urt is of the view that these questions of fact and law can be best answered by the tribunal or the adjudicating authorities below.
In those circumstances, we formally admit the appeal.
By consent of the parties, we have heard it out dispensing with all formalities. Instead of hearing out this appeal on questions of law, it would be proper if the above issues are remanded back to the Tribunal for de novo adjudication upon hearing the parties within four months from the date of communication of this order. We order accordingly.
The Tribunal will be at liberty to further remand the matter to a lower over adjudicating authority for fact finding purposes.
The Tribunal will not be bound by any observation made herein.
As affidavits were not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

JAY CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA

JAY CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA
GST
2018 (10) TMI 876 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT – [2018] 59 G S.T.R. 307 (Guj), 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 440 (Guj.)
GUJARAT HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 11-10-2018
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10828 of 2018
GST
MR AKIL KURESHI AND MR B.N. KARIA, JJ.
For The Petitioner (s) : MR.VINAY SHRAFF, ADVOCATE with MR.VISHAL J DAVE(6515), NIPUN SINGHVI(9653), MR.PRATEEK GATTANI, MS.HIRAL U MEHTA, ADVOCATES
For The Respondent (s): MR ANKIT SHAH (6371)
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1. Petitioner has made following substantive prayers in this petition:
“(a) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ of declaration and/or any other appropriate writ(s) declaring Rule 117 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and Form GST Tran1 as ultra vires to Section 140(5) and Section 164 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and also offends Article 14, Article 19(1)(g), Article 265 and Arti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nd (b) noted above.
3. He however pressed prayer( c) which arises in following factual background.
4. Petitioner no.1 is a company registered under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 ('CGST Act' for short) as well as Gujarat Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 ('GGST Act' for short). With the advent of Goods and Service Tax regime, certain transitional arrangements were made under the statute requiring the dealers and manufacturers to make declarations of the unutilised past tax credits, only upon which, the same would be migrated to the new regime. One of them was a declaration in terms of section 140 of CGST Act which is referred to as TRAN1. Initial time granted under the said provision for making such declaration was three months from the date of bringing the statute into existence i.e. 01.07.2017. Under representations, this time limit was extended from time to time. Final extension was granted till 27.12.2017.
5. The time limit provisions contained in rule

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

corrected.
7. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the statutory provisions concerning filing of the returns envisage scope for correction of the returns, for which, time is granted upto the due date for filing the returns. He submitted that during the transitory period, number of changes took place. It was legitimate that some of the transactions may have been overlooked by the assessees. Not granting opportunity to correct the declaration would result into substantial financial loss to the petitioner and other similarly situated dealers. Counsel relied on the decisions of Supreme Court in case of Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. and Ors. reported in AIR 1987 SC 1023 and in case of Kailash Chandra and Ors. v. Mukundi Lal and Ors. reported in AIR 2002 SC 829 to contend that the statute must be read as a whole and harmonious interpretation of the provision should be granted. His attempt was therefore to persuade us to apply the provisions

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rror was spotted.
9. This Court in case of Willowood Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.(supra) had occasion to examine the scheme under the GGST Act and CGST Act. The transitional provision and in particular of filing TRAN1 declarations and the time limit provisions contained in respect thereof. The challenge of the petitioner in the said case to the time limit provision was mainly twofold. Firstly, that the subordinate legislature did not have the authority to prescribe time limit which was not envisaged in the parent Act and secondly, that in any case such time limit provision should be seen as directory and not mandatory. The Court rejected both the contentions and upheld the time limit prescribed under rule 117 of the Rules.
10. The Court, in the process, made following observations:
“24. It is in exercise of this rule making power, the Government has framed the CGST Rules, 2017 in which; as noted, subrule (1) of Rule 117 has prescribed, besides other things, the time limit for making declara

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ld and observed that how much tax credit has to be given and under what circumstances is a domain of the legislature. In case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Pvt. Limited [Supra], the Supreme Court had upheld a rule which restricts availment of MODVAT credit to six months from the date of issuance of the documents specified in the proviso. The contention that such amendment would take away an existing right was rejected.
26. While the entire tax structure within the country was thus being replaced by a new framework, it was necessary for the legislature to make transitional provisions. Section 140 of the CGST Act, which is a transitional provision, essentially preserves all taxes paid or suffered by a dealer. Credit thereof is to be given in electronic credit register under the new statute, only subject to making necessary declarations in prescribed format within the prescribed time. As noted, subsection [1] of Section 164 of the CGST Act authorizes the Government to make rules for carry

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

without any reference to the time limit, such credits should be allowed to be transferred during the process of migration. Any such view would hamper the effective implementation of the new tax structure and would also lead to endless disputes and litigations. As noted in case of USA Agencies [Supra], the Supreme Court had upheld the vires of a statutory provision contained in the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act which provided that the dealer would have to make a claim for input tax credit before the end of the financial year or before ninety days of purchase; whichever is later. The vires was upheld observing that the legislature consciously wanted to set up the time frame for availment of the input tax credit. Such conditions therefore must be strictly complied with. Thus, merely because the rule in question prescribes a time frame for making a declaration, such provision cannot necessarily be held to be directory in nature and must depend on the context of the statutory scheme.
27

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

to the new regime. Under the new GST laws, the existing tax structure was being replaced by the new set of statutes, through an exercise which was unprecedented in the Indian context. The claims of carry forward of the existing duties and credits during the period of migration, therefore, had to be within the prescribed time. Doing away with the time limit for making declarations could give rise to multiple largescale claims trickling in for years together, after the new tax structure is put in place. This would besides making the task of matching of the credits impractical if not impossible, also impact the revenue collection estimates. It is in this context that the Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries Limited (Supra), after rejecting the contention that a person can move proceedings for recovery of tax paid upon success of some other person before the Tribunal or Court in getting such tax collection declared illegal, was further influenced by the fact that any such situa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Vikas Forgings Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India and others

Vikas Forgings Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India and others
GST
2018 (10) TMI 997 – PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT – TMI
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 11-10-2018
CWP-21823-2018 (O&M)
GST
MR RAJESH BINDAL AND MR MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, JJ.
For The Petitioner : Mr.Balwinder Singh, Advocate for Mr.Rajiv Agnihotri, Advocate
For The Respondent : Mr.Tajender Joshi, Advocate Ms.Mamta Singh Talwar, DAG, Haryana
ORDER
RAJESH BINDAL, J.
The petitioner has filed the pre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =