Author: admin_gst

2018 (8) TMI 691 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – common input services used in trading activity – Department is of the view that the appellant have wrongly utilised Cenvat Credit of input services pertaining to services used in trading of automobile cars – Rule 6 (3a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
–
Held that:- It is a matter of record that the appellant has been engaged in trading of automobile cars along with servicing of the cars and other automobile from the same premises and they have availed Cenvat Credit of various common input services which has been utilised towards both taxable services as well as for trading activity – trading activity abinitio cannot be considered as a “service” because the trading in the cars only involves transfer of property on financial consideration from the appellant dealer to various buyers of automobile cars. The Cenvat Credit facility of input services is only available to the output services rendered by any assessee and thus the Ce

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

services, and other financial services etc under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on the trading activity. The Department is of the view that the appellant have wrongly utilised Cenvat Credit of input services pertaining to services used in trading of automobile cars. Since the trading activity only covers the transfer of goods to the purchaser on payment of cash or any other valuable consideration and therefore such activity is only purely a sale activity and therefore cannot be considered as a service and thus same is beyond the scope of Finance Act, 1994 as well as the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Department in the show cause notice has also mentioned that since the respondent i.e. the appellant-assessee did not maintain separate accounts for input services used towards the trading activity (exempted activity) and that towards servicing of cars, therefore, the appellant are required to pay an amount of Cenvat Credits in terms of Rule 6 (3a) of Cenvat Credi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

f property on financial consideration from the appellant dealer to various buyers of automobile cars. The Cenvat Credit facility of input services is only available to the output services rendered by any assessee and thus the Cenvat Credit of input services used in Trading activity is not allowable as per Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 5. We have heard both sides. The matter is no longer res-integra and we rely upon the judgment in case of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Ruchika Global Interlinks V/s CESTAT, Chennai reported in 2017 (5) GSTL 225 (Mad.). The Hon ble High Court in the judgment cited (supra) has clearly been provided that:- 10.2 Clearly, both before and after amendment, exempted services meant those taxable services, which were exempt from whole of Service Tax and, included those services on which Service Tax was not leviable, under Section 66 of the Finance Act. The inclusion in Explanation to Rule 2(e) trading was, without doubt, only clarificatory. As accepted by

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – Trade Notice No. 10/2018-19 – Dated:- 17-7-2018 – OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER, GOODS & SERVICES TAX HQRS. GST BHAWAN, NAPIER TOWN, JABALPUR (M.P.) 482001 C.No. IV(16)02/Trade Notice/HQ/MP/Tech/2018-19/ Trade Notice No. 10/2018-19 Dated 17.07.2018 Sub: Refund Disposal Fortnight to handhold trade & Industry in clearing pending GST refund claims from 16th July 2018 to 31st July 2018-reg. After the successful completion of ITC/ IGST Refund fortnights in the month of March 2018 (15th to 31st March 2018) & June 2018 (31st May to 16th June 2018) & Special ITC/IGST refund week held by the Department from 09.07.2018 to 14.07.2018 the department is pleased to invite attention of the Trade & Industry to yet another I

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r processing of the pending ITC/IGST refund claims. The asseessees are encouraged to report any difficulties and obstacles in processing of their refund claims, The Department is committed to resolve all the issues at the earliest. 4. The exclusive camps/refund cell has been set up at all divisions of this Commissionerate to deal with the cases of pending ITC related refunds claims from 16th July 2018 to 31st July 2018. All the Taxpayers are advised to contact the following Nodal Officers of the concerned divisions of their jurisdiction to resolve their issues related to refund claims: S.No. Divisions Name of the Nodal Officer E-mail Id and Phone Number 1. Jabalpur-I Shri Tikendra Kumar Kripal, Assistant Commissioner cgstdivljabalpur@email.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 1121 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Condonation of delay in filing appeal – It is the grievance of the appellant that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not condoned the delay of 208 days in filing the appeal – Held that:- As per Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962, the Commissioner (Appeals) has only powers to condone delay upto 30 days – The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises [2007 (12) TMI 11 – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has categorically held that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot condone the delay beyond the said permit provided in the statute – application dismissed. – E/EH/40400/2018 and E/41201/2018 – Final Order No. 42027/2018 – Dated:- 17-7-2018 – Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ionary authority. The other appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) with a delay of 208 days. The delay occurred because the concerned person who handled the matter did not inform the management with regard to the said appeal. He therefore submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) ought to have condoned the delay and accepted the appeal. The appellant therefore seeks out of turn hearing of the appeal. 3. The ld. AR Shri B. Balamurugan supported the findings in the impugned order and also concurred to the early disposal of the appeal. He submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly dismissed the appeal which is beyond the condonable period of the Commissioner (Appeals). As per the statute, the Commissioner (Appeals) can c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hat the Commissioner (Appeals) has not condoned the delay of 208 days in filing the appeal. As per Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962, the Commissioner (Appeals) has only powers to condone delay upto 30 days. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises (supra) has categorically held that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot condone the delay beyond the said permit provided in the statute. For this reason, we find that the impugned order calls for no interference. The impugned order is upheld and the appeal is dismissed. The early hearing application is disposed. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – SURYAKANT MITHBAVKAR – Dated:- 16-7-2018 Last Replied Date:- 21-7-2018 – We have provide CANTEEN facility to our employees free of cost.Whether we are eligible for ITC Credit on purchase of goods for CANTEEN. – Reply By SHIVKUMAR SHARMA – The Reply = No.you are not eligible for ITC on purchase of goods for canteen, Which you are running for provide facility to your employee. – Reply By ANITA BHADRA – The Reply = No , You are not eligible for ITC Credit on

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Tharini R – Dated:- 16-7-2018 Last Replied Date:- 18-7-2018 – We want to sell used plastic injection moulding machineries, kindly let me know the tax rate for the same. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, If the said machinery is older than 5 years and if you have not availed any credit in erstwhile law, than the value shall be the transaction value. The Rate is 18%. Sl.No. 330 Ch.8438 of Notification No. 1/2017-CT (Rate) dated 28.07.2017, as amended

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – Clarification on taxability of custom milling of paddy – Milling of paddy is not an intermediate production process in relation to cultivation of plants. – Rate of GST is 5% – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – GST is not leviable on General Insurance policies provided by a State Government to employees of the State government/ Police personnel, employees of Electricity Department or students

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – Mere cutting and packing of fabrics into pieces of different lengths from bundles or thans, will not change the nature of these goods and such pieces of fabrics would continue to be cla

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – Supply of goods or services or both between related persons or between distinct persons as specified in Section 25, when made in the course or furtherance of business, even if, without

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Chargeability of tax/GST – Classification of goods – support services of loading, unloading, packaging, storage or warehousing of agriculture produce – if any processing is do

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Bio Fertilizer – rate of GST – Bio-Fertilizers, other than those put up in Unit Container and bearing a brand name will covered under Schedule I of rate of GST on Goods and wo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – By: – Mr. M. GOVINDARAJAN – Dated:- 16-7-2018 – Appeal to Appellate Authority Section 98(4) of Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 ( Act for short) provides that where an application for advance ruling is admitted, the Authority for Advance Ruling shall, after examining such further material as may be placed before it by the applicant or obtained by the Authority and after providing an opportunity of being heard to the applicant or his authorized representative as well as to the concerned officer or his authorized representative, pronounce its advance ruling on the question specified in the application. Section 100 of the Act provides the procedure for filing appeal against the order of the Authority for Advance Ruling before the Appellate Authority for Advance Rulings. The said section provides that the concerned officer, the jurisdictional officer or an applicant aggrieved by any advance ruling pronounced under sub-section (4) of section 98, may appea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under the provisions of a State Goods and Services Tax Act or a Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act shall be deemed to be the Appellate Authority in respect of that State or Union territory. State Appellate Authorities The list of State Appellate Authorities appointed by the respective States are furnished as below- Name of State/ Union Territory Member – State Government Member – Central Government Office Address Telephone/Fax Email id of office (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Chandigarh Shri Ajit Balaji Joshi, IAS Excise & Taxation Commissioner Deputy Commissioner Office, Sector 17, Chandigarh 0172-2700109 dc-chd@nic.in. Andhra Pradesh Sri. J. Syamala Rao, I.A.S., Chief Commissioner of State Tax, Andhra Prades Sri. Y.S Shahrawath, I.R.S., Chief Commissioner of Central Tax – Visakhapatnam Zone O/o Chief Commissioner of Central Tax & Customs, 1st Floor, GST Bhavan, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra pradesh – 530035 0866-2821174, ap_cct@apct.g

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

mp; CX Zone, Bengaluru Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (Karnataka), Vanijya Terige Karyalaya, Kalidasa Road, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru560009 Tel.No.: 080-22262935; Fax No.: 080-22263595 email: cto.karbng@nic.in. Kerala / Lakshadweep Shri.Dr.Rajan N Khobragade IAS, Commissioner of State Tax Shri. Pullela Nageswara Rao, IRS, Chief Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs STATE: 9th Floor, Tax Towers, Killippalam, Karamana P.O., Thiruvananthapuram PIN695002 CENTRE: Office of the Chief Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs, Thiruvananthapuram Zone, Central Revenue Building, I.S.Press Road, Kochi-682 018 0471-2785202; 0471-2785203 cct.ctd@kerala.gov.in. 0484-2394100/0404 Fax: 0484-2397614 cccochin@nic.in Maharashtra Shri Rajiv jalota, Commissioner of State Tax Ms.Sungita Sharma, Chief Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Mumbai Zone 15th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 Tel.No.: 022-22049150 Fax.No.: 022-22747802

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

email: cct@ctd.tn.gov.in. Telangana Sri. V. Anil Kumar, Commissioner of State Tax Shri Bankey Behari Agrawal, Chief Commissioner, Central Tax and Customs O/o Commissioner of State Tax, C.T.Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad Tel.040-24652356 Fax.040-24618912 e-mail – tg_cct@tgct.gov.in. Uttar Pradesh Smt.Kamini Chauhan Ratan (IAS) Commissioner Commercial Tax Dept, UP Sri P.M. Govande, Chief Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Lucknow Zone 4, Vibhuti Khnad, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow – 226010 0522 – 2721147 ctcomhqlu-up@nic.in 0522 – 2233136 ccu-cexlko@nic.in. Uttarakhand Smt. Sowjanya, Commissioner of State Tax, Uttarakhand Shri S.H. Hasan, Chief Commissioner, Customs & CGST, Meerut Zone, Meeru O/o the Commissioner of Commercial of CGST, Commissionerate, E-Block, Nehru Colony, Haridwar Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Ph.0135-2668668(O) Fax.0135-2668732 email-acdehradun@gmail.com. Source: www.gstcouncil.gov.in The said website reported on appeal order passed by Maharashtra Appellate Authority

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (7) TMI 1389 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Works contract – Commercial or Industrial Construction Service – demand of service tax on two on-going projects which had been carried out from the period July 2006 to September 2009 – Held that:- Part of the demand would fall prior to 1.6.207 being works contract service and hit by the decision in the case of Larsen & Toubro [2015 (8) TMI 749 – SUPREME COURT].
–
Demand of service tax – sub-contractor – The demand is made against the appellant merely alleging that he is the main contractor and although the contractor has discharged the service tax, it is only the sub-contractor and therefore the appellant is liable to pay service tax – Held that:- There is no merit in this allegation of the department – The construction services had already suffered service tax as the contractor who is engaged in the construction of building/complex has discharged service tax. Further, the circular also makes it clear that when a contractor is engaged in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commercial or Industrial Construction Service and the construction of residential complex service, they stopped paying service tax from October 2006 onwards. They had thus not paid service tax in respect of two on-going projects which were Manchester Grand and Manchester Albatross comprising flats and independent bungalows. After investigation, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant proposing to demand service tax for the period from July 2006 to September 2009 under construction of residential complex in respect of these residential complexes. After due process of law, the adjudicating authority confirmed an amount of ₹ 1,48,17,194/- along with interest and also imposed equal penalty under Section 78 of the Act. Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, Shri M. Karthikeyan, ld. Counsel submitted that part of the period involved is prior to 1.6.2007 and the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Kerala Vs. Larsen &am

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ry same construction activities of these two complexes, the demand cannot sustain. 3. The ld. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy supported the findings in the impugned order. He referred to Circular No. 108/2/2009-ST dated 29.1.2009 and argued that the appellant though a developer / promoter is the main contractor of the building and the contractor who has carried out the construction activity is merely a sub-contractor. Being the main contractor, the appellant is liable to pay service tax. 4. Heard both sides. 5. The foremost issue that has to be looked into is that the demand of service tax on two on-going projects which had been carried out from the period July 2006 to September 2009. Part of the demand would fall prior to 1.6.207 being works contract service and hit by the decision in the case of Larsen & Toubro (supra). Needless to say that these construction services are composite service for the reason that the demand itself has been confirmed after granting 67% abatement as per t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD. Versus STATE TAX OFFICER, INVESTIGATION BRANCH, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KOLLAM, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THE BRANCH MANAGER, ICICI BANK LTD, KOLKATTA AND STATE OF KERALA STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 2018 (7) TMI 1636 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2018 (18) G. S. T. L. 29 (Ker.) – Availability of alternative remedy of appeal – invocation of Bank Guarantee – Held that:- In terms of Section 107 of the Act, read with Rule 108 of the Goods and Services Tax Rules, to appeal, the petitioner has three months' time from the date of Ext.P8 impugned order. The 7th respondent i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he petitioner provided Ext.P6 bank guarantee as well as Ext.P6(a) security bond, before the 1st respondent, and had the machinery and the transport vehicle released. 2. At any rate, faced with adverse orders, the petitioner contemplates invoking the appellate remedy. Now, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition ventilating his grievance that before the petitioner could invoke the appellate remedy, the 1st respondent is threatening to invoke the bank guarantee. According to the petitioner's counsel, the appellate forum itself was very recently created and still the procedural mondalities have yet to be finalised. In the meanwhile, if the respondents invoke the bank guarantee, the petitioner's right to statutory remedies becomes i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – G.O.Ms.No. 133 – Dated:- 16-7-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA Revenue (CT-II) Department G.O.Ms.No. 133 Dated: 16-07-2018 NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 164 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No. 23 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following Rules further to amend the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- (1) These Rules may be called the Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Sixth Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) Save as otherwise provided in these Rules, they shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette. 2. In the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017,- (i) in rule 58, after sub-rule (1), the following sub-rule s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ule (1), the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:- Provided that where the circumstances so warrant, the Commissioner, or any other officer authorized by him, may, on sufficient cause being shown, extend the time for recording of the final report in Part B of FORM EWB- 03, for a further period not exceeding three days. Explanation.- The period of twenty four hours or, as the case may be, three days shall be counted from the midnight of the date on which the vehicle was intercepted. ;. (iii) in rule 142, in sub-rule (5), after the words and figures of section 76 , the words and figures or section 129 or section 130 shall be inserted; (iv) after FORM GST ENR-01, the following FORM shall be inserted, namely:- FORM GST ENR-02 [See Rule

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (8) TMI 363 – DELHI HIGH COURT – TMI – Jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax (West) for pending matters – Petitioner submits that the Notification dated 19.06.2017 had the effect of transferring jurisdiction to the Commissioner now exercising jurisdiction over it – Held that:- The impugned order of the Commissioner in this case, especially, does not disclose that the petitioner has urged an issue of jurisdiction. This Court is of the opinion that given the circumstances of this case, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to approach the CESTAT against the impugned order – petition disposed off. – W.P.(C) 6561/2018 & CM APPL. 25039-40/2018 Dated:- 16-7-2018 – MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. A. K. CHAWLA JJ. Petit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

isting adjudicatory officials, especially the Commissioners of Central Excise and Customs. The petitioner submits that the Notification dated 19.06.2017 had the effect of transferring jurisdiction to the Commissioner now exercising jurisdiction over it i.e. the concerned Commissioner at Gurugram since it is now located there and the respondents are well aware of this. The impugned order of the Commissioner in this case, especially, does not disclose that the petitioner has urged an issue of jurisdiction. This Court is of the opinion that given the circumstances of this case, it would be appropriate for the petitioner to approach the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) against the impugned order; in such event the pet

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – G.O.Ms. No. 131 – Dated:- 16-7-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA Revenue (CT-II) Department G.O.Ms. No. 131 Dated: 16-07-2018 NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No.23 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following Rules further to amend the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- (1) These Rules may be called the Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) Save as otherwise provided, they shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette. 2. In the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017,- (i) in rule 37, in sub-rule (1), after the proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:- Provided further that the value of supplies on account of any amount added in accordance with the provisions of clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 15 shall be deemed to have been paid for the purposes of the second p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t July, 2017, in rule 95, in sub-rule (3), for clause (a), the following shall be substituted, namely:- (a) the inward supplies of goods or services or both were received from a registered person against a tax invoice; ; (v) in rule 97, in sub-rule (1), after the proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:- Provided further that an amount equivalent to fifty per cent. of the amount of cess determined under sub-section (5) of section 54 read with section 11 of the Goods and Services Tax (Compensation to States) Act, 2017 (15 of 2017), shall be deposited in the Fund. ; (vi) in rule 133, for sub-rule (3), the following shall be substituted, namely:- (3) Where the Authority determines that a registered person has not passed on the benefit of the reduction in the rate of tax on the supply of goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices, the Authority may order- (a) reduction in prices; (b) return to the recipi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

after clause (n), the following clause shall be inserted, namely:- (o) where empty cylinders for packing of liquefied petroleum gas are being moved for reasons other than supply. ; (viii) in FORM GSTR-4, in the Instructions, for Sl. No. 10, the following shall be substituted, namely:- 10. For the tax periods July, 2017 to September, 2017, October, 2017 to December, 2017, January, 2018 to March, 2018 and April, 2018 to June, 2018, serial 4A of Table 4 shall not be furnished. ; (ix) with effect from 01st July, 2017, in FORM GST PCT-01, in PART B, (a) against Sl. No. 4, after entry (10), the following shall be inserted, namely:- (11) Sales Tax practitioner under existing law for a period of not less than five years (12) tax return preparer under existing law for a period of not less than five years ; (b) after the Consent , the following shall be inserted, namely:- Declaration I hereby declare that: (i) I am a citizen of India; (ii) I am a person of sound mind; (iii) I have not been adjud

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

lies in case refund is claimed by recipient Tax paid GSTIN of the supplier No. Date Taxable Value Integrated Tax Central Tax State Tax/Union territory Tax Cess 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . (xi) in FORM GST RFD-01A, in Annexure-1, (a) for Statement 1A, the following Statement shall be substituted, namely:- Statement 1A [see rule 89(2)(h)] Refund Type: ITC accumulated due to inverted tax structure [clause (ii) of first proviso to section 54(3)] Sl.No Details of invoices of inward supplies received Tax paid on inward supplies Details of invoices of outward supplies issued Tax paid on outward supplies GSTIN of the supplier No. Date Taxable Value Integrated Tax Central Tax State Tax/Union territory Tax No. Date Taxable Value Integrated Tax Central Tax State Tax/Union territory Tax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . (b) for Statement 5B, the following Statement shall be substituted, namely:- Statement 5B [see rule 89(2)(g)] Refund Type: On account of deemed exports (Amount in Rs) Sl.No. Details of in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – KA.NI.-2-1311/XI-9(42)/17 – Dated:- 16-7-2018 – Uttar Pradesh Shasan Sansthagat Vitta, Kar Evam Nibandhan Anubhag -2 NOTIFICATION NO.KA.NI.-2-1311/XI-9(42)/17-U.P.GST Rules-2017-ORDER-(130)-2018, Lucknow : Dated : 16-7-2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (U.P Act No. 1 of 2017), read with section 21 of the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1904 (U.P. Act No. 1 of 1904), the Governor is pleased to make the following rules with a view amending the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- Short title and commencement 1. (1) These Rules may be called the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (Seventeenth Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) Save as otherwise provided, they shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from 13th day of June, 2018. Amendment of rule 37. 2. In the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, hereinafter referred to as the said rules, in rule 37, in su

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

supply of goods and services. Explanation:- For the purposes of this sub-rule, the expressions – (a) Net ITC shall mean input tax credit availed on inputs during the relevant period other than the input tax credit availed for which refund is claimed under sub-rules (4A) or (4B) or both; and (b) Adjusted Total turnover shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in sub-rule (4). Amendment of rule 95. 5. In the said rules, in rule 95, in sub-rule (3), for clauses (a), the following shall be substituted and deemed to have been substituted with effect from 01st July, 2017, namely:- (a) the inward supplies of goods or services or both were received from a registered person against a tax invoice; ; Amendment of rule 97. 6. In the said rule 97, in sub-rule (1), after the proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:- Provided further that an amount equivalent to fifty per cent. of the amount of cess determined under sub-section (5) of section 54 read with section 11 of the Goods

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r section 57 and the remaining fifty per cent. of the amount in the Fund constituted under section 57 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 of the concerned State, where the eligible person does not claim return of the amount or is not identifiable; (d) imposition of penalty as specified under the Act; and (e) cancellation of registration under the Act. Explanation: For the purpose of this sub-rule, the expression, concerned State means the State in respect of which the Authority passes an order. ; Amendment of rule 138. 8. In the said rule 138, in sub-rule (14), after clause (n), the following clause shall be inserted, namely:- (o) where empty cylinders for packing of liquefied petroleum gas are being moved for reasons other than supply. ; Amendment of FORM GSTR-4. 9. in the said rules, in FORM GSTR-4, in the Instructions, for Sl. No. 10, the following shall be substituted, namely:- 10. For the tax periods July, 2017 to September, 2017, October, 2017 to December, 2017, January, 2018

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

section 54(3)] Sl.No Details of invoices of inward supplies received Tax paid on inward supplies Details of invoices of outward supplies issued Tax paid on outward supplies GSTIN of the supplier No. Date Taxable Value Integrated Tax Central Tax State Tax/Union territory Tax No. Date Taxable Value Integrated Tax Central Tax State Tax/Union territory Tax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . (b) for Statement 5B, the following Statement shall be substituted, namely:- Statement 5B [see rule 89(2)(g)] Refund Type: On account of deemed exports (Amount in Rs) Sl.No. Details of invoices of outward supplies in case refund is claimed by supplier/Details of invoices of inward supplies in case refund is claimed by recipient Tax paid GSTIN of the supplier No. Date Taxable Value Integrated Tax Central Tax State Tax/Union territory Tax Cess 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . Amendment of FORM GST RFD-01A 12. In the said rules, in FORM GST RFD-01A, in Annexure-1, (a) for Statement 1A, the following Statement shall be

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (8) TMI 1091 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – Valuation – includibility – investment subsidy against Entitlement Certificate sanctioned under the above policy – Held that:- The issue of liability of payment of excise duty on the subsidy amounts has been decided in favour of the appellant in the case of GREENLAM INDUSTRIES LTD [2018 (4) TMI 1552 – CESTAT NEW DELHI], where it was held that there is no justification for inclusion in the assessable value, the VAT amounts paid by the assessee using VAT 37B Challans.
–
There can be no liability for payment of excise duty on the VAT subsidy amount – penalty also set aside – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Ex. Appeal No. 51465 of 2018 – A/52554/2018-EX[DB] – Dated:- 16-7-2018 – Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) And Ms. Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial) Sh. G. G. Gupta, Advocate for the appellant Ms. Tamana Alam, AR for the Respondent ORDER Per: V. Padmanabhan: The present appeal is against the Order-in-Appeal No. 87/(A

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ellant in several decisions. He specifically brought to notice the decision of the Tribunal in Final Order No. 51427 – 51514/2018 dated 11.04.2018. He pointed out that out of the 88 appellants, in the case was disposed of by the Tribunal vide the above order, the appellant was one of the appellants therein for a different period. He submits that since the duty demand has been decided in favour of the appellant, there is no justification for imposition of penalty. 4. Revenue is represented by Ms. Tamana Alam, ld. AR. She reiterated the finding of the lower authority. 5. After hearing both sides and on perusal of record including the order of the Tribunal, we note that the issue of liability of payment of excise duty on the subsidy amounts has been decided in favour of the appellant vide the order cited by the appellant. The observation of the Tribunal are reproduced below for ready reference: 1. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants have established their factories in the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed to include such subsidy amounts in the value of the goods cleared by the appellants and demanded the difference of the duty. Being aggrieved, the appellants have filed the present appeals. 2. With this background we heard the Ld. Advocates for the appellant and Shri M.R. Sharma, Ld DR for the Revenue. 3. After hearing both sides and on perusal of record, it appears that the identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of Shree Cements Ltd. V/s CCE, Alwar 2018-TIOL-748-CESTAT-DEL where it was observed that:- 7. We have heard both sides at length and perused the appeal record. As out lined above, the appellants are covered by the Investment Promotion Schemes of the Rajasthan Government. In terms of the various schemes of the Rajasthan Government, the appellants are required to discharge their VAT liability by making payment of the same. Out of such VAT credited to the Government, a certain portion is disbursed back to them in the form of subsidies. Such disbursement hap

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of Welspun Corporation Ltd. (Supra) has distinguished the decision of the Apex Court in the light of Gujarat VAT Act, 2003. In the Welspun Corporation Ltd. case, the assesse had opted for remission of tax scheme under which a portion of the VAT paid was remitted back to the assessee. The Tribunal held that such subsidy amounts are not required to the included in the transaction value. 9. In the present case we know that for the initial period the assessees are required to remit the VAT recovered by them at the time of sale of the goods manufactured. A part of such VAT is given back to them in the form of subsidy in Challan 37 B. Such Challans are as good as cash but can be used only for payment of VAT in the subsequent period. In terms of the scheme of the Government of Rajasthan payment of VAT using such Challan are considered legal payments of tax. In view of the above, Revenue is not correct in taking the view that VAT liability discharged by utilizing such subsidy challans cannot b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

in in production, employment of certain percentage of persons in assessee unit, and numerous other conditions as brought out in Para 9 of the impugned Order-in-Appeal. 11. By following the decision of the Tribunal in the Welspun Corporation Ltd. case we conclude that there is no justification for inclusion in the assessable value, the VAT amounts paid by the assessee using VAT 37B Challans. 12. In the result, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed. 5. By following our earlier order (supra), we set aside the impugned orders and allow all the appeals with consequential relief, if any . 6. By following the above order, we come to the conclusion that there can be no liability for payment of excise duty on the VAT subsidy amount. Consequently, the liability for penalty also does not arise. 7. In the result, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court). – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Management

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (8) TMI 1649 – KERLA HIGH COURT – TMI – Unable to upload FORM GST TRAN-1 within the stipulated time – availability of Input tax credit – Held that:- The Ext.P2 is the circular issued by the Government of India for “setting up an IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism to address the grievances of taxpayers due to technical glitches on GST Portal.” – the petitioner may apply to the additional seventh respondent, the Nodal Officer. The petitioner applying, the Nodal Officer will look into the issue and facilitate the petitioner’s uploading FORM GST TRAN-1, without reference to the time-frame – petition disposed off. – W.P.(C). No. 23117 of 2018 (L) Dated:- 16-7-2018 – DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. Petitioners: By Advs. Sri. U. Balagangadharan Sri.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r, besides perusing the record. 3. The Ext.P2 is the circular issued by the Government of India for setting up an IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism to address the grievances of taxpayers due to technical glitches on GST Portal. Paragraph 5 of the circular outlines the procedure the Nodal Officers is to follow. It reads: 5. Nodal officers and identification of issues. 5.1 GSTN, Central and State government would appoint nodal officers in requisite number to address the problem a taxpayer faces due to glitches, if any, in the Common Portal. This would be publicized adequately. 5.2 Taxpayers shall make an application to the field officers or the nodal officers where there was a demonstrable glitch on the Common Portal in relation to an identifi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

itioner but also many other people faced this technical glitch and approached this Court. Both the learned counsel submit that this Court on earlier occasions permitted the petitioners to apply to the additional sixth respondent for the issue resolution. 5. So, in this case also, the petitioner may apply to the additional seventh respondent, the Nodal Officer. The petitioner applying, the Nodal Officer will look into the issue and facilitate the petitioner s uploading FORM GST TRAN-1, without reference to the time-frame. Ordered so. 6. I may also observe that if the petitioner applies within two weeks after receiving this judgment, the Nodal Officer will consider and take steps within a week thereafter. If the uploading of FORM GST TRAN-1 i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 684 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – 2018 (17) G. S. T. L. 589 (Mad.) – Unable to upload Form GST TRAN-1 – input tax credit – migration to GST regime – Held that:- It was brought to the notice of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes (CBIC) and Customs that about difficulties faced by section of tax payers owing to technical glitches on the GST and representations were given by the petitioners. Therefore, CBIC is setting up a Grievance Redressal Mechanism vide Circular No.39/13/2018- GST dated 03.04.2018.
–
The procedure of appointment of Nodal Officers and identification of issues is to be done in the manner provided in Paragraph 5 of the Circular. Unless the Nodal Officers are appointed, jurisdictional officer of the Assessee, namely Assessing Officer would not be in a position to forward the representations/applications filed by the Assessee pointing out the glitches they are facing while availing the credit during the transition process.
–
The respective Commissioner of GS

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

) COMMON ORDER In the batch of cases, there are varied prayers sought by the petitioners. The sum and substance of the prayer of the petitioners is that they are unable to upload Form GST TRAN-1 to take credit of the Input Tax /Service Tax/Central Excise Duty availed by them at the time of migration within the time stipulated. 2.The petitioners would state that they were unable to uploaded Form GST TRAN- 1 within the time stipulated on account of some error. Therefore, the petitioners seek for appropriate direction in this regard. 3. Similar prayers were made before the High Court of Chhattisgarh, High Court of Delhi and High Court of Kerala and the High Court of Chhattisgarh in W.P (T) No.68 of 2018 dated 14.05.2018 has issued appropriate directions. Operative portion of the orders reads as follows: 7. After going through the aforesaid circular and the scheme of the circular, I am convinced that complete procedure has been prescribed for redressal of grievance which the petitioner has

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 and batch dated 09.04.2018 directed the petitioners to approach the concerned Nodal Officer with brief representations outlining their grievances and the Nodal Officer or the Redressal Committee was directed to appropriately deal with representations in accordance with the circular dated 03.04.2018. 5. So far as the Kerala High Court is concerned, in W.P.No.17348 of 2018 dated 14.06.2018, the following direction has been issued: Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case as also the orders passed in similar matters, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to prefer an application before the additional sixth respondent, the Nodal Officer appointed to resolve issues in the nature of one raised by the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that if the petitioner prefers an application within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, same shall be considered and appropriate decision shall be taken b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of TRAN-1 filing either at the stage of original or revised filing as they could not digitally authenticate the TRAN-1s due to IT related glitches. As a result, a large number of such TRAN-1s are stuck in the system. GSTN shall identify such taxpayers who could not file TRAN-1 on the basis of electronic audit trail. It has been decided that all such taxpayers, who tried but were not able to complete TRAN-1 procedure (original or revised of filing them on or before 27.12.2017 due to IT glitch, shall be provided the facility to complete TRAN-1 filing. It is clarified that the last date for filing of TRAN-1 is not being extended in general and only these identified taxpayers shall be allowed to complete the process of filing TRAN-1. 8.2.The Taxpayers shall not be allowed to amend the amount of credit in TRAN-1 during this process vis-a-vis the amount of credit which was recorded by the taxpayer in the TRAN-1, which could not be filed. If needed, GSTN May request field formations for Centr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d 03.04.2018 is confined to non-TRAN-1 issues. However, I find there is no such specific distinction brought about in paragraph 5 of the circular. Therefore, it can be safely held that the procedure of appointment of Nodal Officers and identification of issues is to be done in the manner provided in Paragraph 5 of the Circular. Unless the Nodal Officers are appointed, jurisdictional officer of the Assessee, namely Assessing Officer would not be in a position to forward the representations/applications filed by the Assessee pointing out the glitches they are facing while availing the credit during the transition process. 10. The learned Government Advocate submits that the Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Government of Tamil Nadu vide proceedings dated 18.5.2018 nominated Mr.S.Ramasamy, Joint Commissioner (CS) as the State Level Nodal Officer to address the problem faced by the tax payers due to IT glitches, if any, in the GST portal. The Senior Standing Council

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 1205 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Restoration of appeal – appeal was dismissed for non-compliance with pre-deposit – Held that:- There are no grounds to restore the appeal which has been dismissed for non-compliance of pre-deposit – Althrough, the appellant was represented by his counsel and therefore cannot contend that he was not aware of dismissal of appeal for non-compliance – appeal cannot be restored – restoration of appeal application dismissed. – ST/ROA/40305/2018 and ST/Misc./30306/2018 in ST/538/2010 – Misc. Order No.40572-40573/2018 – Dated:- 16-7-2018 – Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri J. Shankar Raman, Advocate for the Appellant Shri A. Cletus, Addl. Comm

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he appeal was dismissed for non-compliance on 7.6.2013. It is the case of the appellant that there was a change of counsel and that they were not aware of the dismissal of the appeal for non-deposit. Further, they have not received the order passed by the Tribunal with regard to dismissal of the appeal. The appellant had applied by RTI to ensure whether the final order was served upon them. Information was received that the final order was dispatched by the Tribunal and there is no proof that it was delivered to the appellant. Therefore, the ld. counsel prayed that the appeal may be restored to the file. The appellant has also filed another miscellaneous application seeking to modify the stay order passed by the Tribunal directing to predep

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

pellant had deposited only ₹ 5 lakhs. Thereafter, they had filed an application seeking for extension of time in which the Tribunal had granted six weeks further time and also made it clear that it was the final opportunity for extension for making the predeposit. Though the predeposit was directed to be complied on or before 23.5.2013, the same was not complied and appeal dismissed on 7.6.2013. The appellant was represented by his counsel on the said day and it was reported that the compliance has not been made. Thereupon, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-compliance. We find no grounds to restore the appeal which has been dismissed for non-compliance of predeposit. Althrough, the appellant was represented by his counsel and

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 1206 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Application for early hearing – early hearing sought on the ground that the amount involved is more than ₹ 17 crores and that the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr. Vs. Intercontinental consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. [2018 (3) TMI 357 – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] – Held that:- Early hearing application is allowed. – ST/EH/40267/2018 in ST/40538/2018 – Misc. Order No. 40567/2018 –

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (11) TMI 958 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 167 (A. A. R. – GST) – Exemption from GST – Classification of goods – Frozen Meat of Sheep and Goats – Classified under Tariff Item No. 0204 or not – exemption under N/N. 02/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 – Supply of meat in gunny bag – whether unit container or not?
–
Held that:- For the details indicated also for fact that they are also supplying meat as per Tender of the Indian Army under similar terms and conditions, we find that these facts are similar to the facts recorded by us in the Advance Ruling already given in case of M/s. Monrovia Leasing and Finance Pvt Ltd [2018 (10) TMI 1244 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA], where it was held that The impugned product would be covered by notification 2/2017 – Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June, 2017 as amended by serial no.9 of the Notification no.44/2017 – Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 14th November 2017 and would be exem

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as the CGST Act and MGST Act ] by M. U.N. AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect on the following questions. Whether our product or goods fall under chapter tariff heading 0204 and exemption given to this tariff item vide Notification No. 02/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 is available to us or not ? We are supplying meat in HDPE gunny Bag. Whether it is treated as unit container or not? At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provision under the MGST Act. Further to the earlier, henceforth for the purposes of this Advance Ruling, a reference to such a similar provision under

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ance of Tender Note 3. Trade Mark Search Report (including Details of Class/ Goods covered) 4. Sample Purchase Order from Army (Demand for Contracted Items) Further we have to state that following are the two questions on which advance ruling was required; a. Whether our product or goods fall under chapter tariff heading 0204 and exemption given to this tariff item vide Notification No. 02/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 is available to us or not ? b. We are supplying meat in HDPE gunny Bag. Whether it is treated as unit container or not? We have relied on following two notification; Notification No. 02/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 Notification No. 44/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 14/11/2017. A conjoint reading of above mentioned notifications reveals that GST is chargeable on meat subject to fulfillment of following condition, otherwise it is exempt. w.e.f. 1st July 2017 to 14th November 2017 Must be Frozen Must be put up in unit container. w.e.f. 15th Novemb

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rand registered as on or after the 15th May2017 under the Copyright Act, 1957(14 of 1957); (C) a brand registered as on or after the 15th May 2017 under any law for the time being in force in any other country. GST is charged only when all three conditions are satisfied. Out of three condition one important condition is that product must bear registered brand name. We do not have any brand name for our product. But we have registered our company's logo (M.U.N.) under The Trade Mark Act. However we are not using that logo on HDPE bags used for packaging of Our product. We are sticking label (sample copy is already submitted in last hearing) indicating details like Manufactured & Packed at , FSSAI NO., Storage Instruction, Batch No. and Date of packaging as all this details mandatory as per FSS Act. Our point of view:- As per definition, registered brand name means name which is used in relation to such specified goods for the purpose of indicating connection between such specifi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

any weight / pre-determined quantity/number on such bag and also in one bag we are not packing Standard/ fixed quantity. Hence We are interpreting that our bag is not an unit container. 03. CONTENTION – AS PER THE CONCERNED OFFICER – The submission, as reproduced verbatim, could be seen thus- Submissions on 25.06.2018 Sr.No. 1 to 13 No comments (These provide details of the applicant) Sr.No. 14 Question (1) – Dressed frozen meat packed in HDPE gunny bags supplied by applicant would not fall under the chapter tariff heading 0204 and therefore, exemption given vide Notification No. 02/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) would not be available to the applicant in this case. However, in the case of dressed chilled meat it would be fall under the Chapter tariff heading 0204 and therefore, exemption Vide Notification NO. 02/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) would be available. Sr. NO. 14 Question (2) – The impugned packing would Satisfy the requirement of the definition of unit container as found in the Noti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

any fixed weight in one bag nor mentioning any specific weight on the label, it should still qualify as Unit Contained' as the weight or meat to be supplied is predetermined according to their contract (sample copy enclosed). Since the weight of the Carcass is weighed and labelled by the applicant as described in sr.no. 12B (2) and as the concerned person are aware of the weight of meat being supplied to them by their vendor, it qualifies as Predetermined quantity Sr. no. 15 Statement containing applicant's interpretation – Point no. (1) – no comments Point no. (2 & 3) – On a similar issue, in the case of M/s. Ahmednagar District Goat Rearing and Processing Co-op Federation Ltd, the Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling has also observed that the whole animal carcass in its natural shape in frozen state in different weight and sizes packed in LDPE bags without mentioning the weight would still qualify as unit container. Therefore, it should qualify as unit container. Sr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Sh. Mohammed Sufiyan Nagani, Director appeared made contentions as per their ARA. They were requested to provide copy of Tender, Trade Mark Certificate class of goods covered by this trademark which they agreed to submit. The jurisdictional officer, Ms. Nishtha Sharma, Asstt. Commissioner of GST & CE, Division-III, Belapur Commissionerate appeared and made written submissions. 05. OBSERVATIONS We have perused the records on file and gone through the facts of the case and the submissions made by the applicant and the department. The written contention submitted by the applicant and jurisdictional officer are also considered on this issue. Applicant M/s. M.U.N Agro Industries Pvt Ltd is private limited company which deals in Sheep and Goat meat and has a processing and freezing plant located at Palghar district and head office is at Vashi. The applicant submits that he is a supplier of the meat dressed chilled/frozen at various stations of command of the army as per the agreed terms

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ions, we find that these facts are similar to the facts recorded by us in the Advance Ruling already given in case of M/s. Monrovia Leasing and Finance Pvt Ltd bearing order No. GST-ARA-20/ 2017-18/B-83, Mumbai, dated 04/08/2018 = 2018 (10) TMI 1244 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA. For the sake of clarity we reproduce the relevant observation recorded by us in case of M/s. Monrovia Leasing and Finance Pvt Ltd which are as below- Now we have been called on to find out whether the facts mentioned above have any similarity with the facts of the present case. From the facts submitted by the applicant and veted by jurisdictional officer by paying visit to the factory we find that the facts of the present case are substantially different front M/S. Ahmednagar District Goat Rearing and Procession Co-operative Federation Ltd. To summarize the facts we find that the period in case of ARA ruling is from 01/07/2017 till present and going forward whereas in case of appellant it is from

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ied to the Army by various firms through Annual Contracts. As per order on the subject, the net weight / numbers of the item is not required to be mentioned on the packaging Thus the issue before us is whether such supply is covered by the expressions 'unit container' as defined in the notifications mentioned. The expression 'unit container' as defined in the notification is as below: Explanation-for the purpose of this schedule (Notification 1/2017 and 2/2017-lntergrated Tax (Rate) both dated 28th June, 2017 The phrase unit container means a package, whether large or small (for example, tin, can, box, jar, bottle, bag, or carton, drum, barrel, or canister) designed to hold a predetermined quantity or number, which is indicated on such package. For the purpose of above definition package to be called 'unit container' has to satisfy following conditions simultaneously- 1. Package may be large or small 2. Packaging designed to hold predetermined quantity or number

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t the frozen meat of sheep / goat in HDPE gunny bag which do not indicate any information related to weight / number of carcass packed in such bags would tantamount to being as a product not put up in unit container and thus falls under chapter tariff heading 0204 and is further covered by serial no. 9 of Notification No-2/2017 Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 as amended. 06. In view of the deliberations as herein above, we pass the order as under:- ORDER (Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) NO. GST-ARA-17/2018-19/B-68 Mumbai, dt. 16.07.2018 For reasons as discussed in the body of the order, the questions are answered thus – Q.A Whether our product or goods fall under chapter tariff heading 0204 and exemption given to this tariff item vide Notification No. 02/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 is available to us or not? Answer: – Answered in the affirmative. Q.B. We are supplying meat in HDPE

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – rajesh marwaha – Dated:- 15-7-2018 Last Replied Date:- 18-8-2018 – Our Client is a primary school. They collect Transportation charges from students. They have engaged vans to pick and drop students, whom they pay on monthly basis.The turnover of school is above ₹ 20.00 Lacs.Is the charging of Transportation expenses liable to GST? – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Exempted vide Notification No.12/17-(Central Tax Rate) dated 28.6.17 (Serial No.6

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =