Author: admin_gst

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – SHRIRAM AGRAWAL – Dated:- 10-7-2018 Last Replied Date:- 12-7-2018 – If have received an advance from our customer in May' 2018 and paid GST on the same by disclosing the same under advance received in GSTR 1 however, later on in the month of June' 2018, the advance was refunded to party due to some issues. Now where we can adjust this refund of advance in GSTR 1 of June' 2018. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, In this regards, Section 31 (3)(e) of the CGST Act, 2017 is reproduced below:- (e) where, on receipt of advance payment with respect to any supply of goods or services or both the registered person issues a receipt voucher, but subsequently no supply is made and no tax invoic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – In order to engage with the stakeholders and invite comments from the public at large, the Department of Revenue has decided to make available the proposed amendments in CGST Act, 2017, IGST Act, 2017 and the GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017 in the public domain. The draft proposals for amendments can be seen here. You are invited to submit your comments/feedback on the draft proposals for amendments through this discussion on MyGov.in. T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Fraudulent issuance of tax invoices under GST – allegation of business of generating and selling of fake tax invoices to various entities without supplying the underlying good

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Kalpessh Daftary – Dated:- 10-7-2018 Last Replied Date:- 13-7-2018 – We are registered under GST from Mumbai and we avail facility from Gujarat State ( We pay out Hotel bill Room tariff ) which has CGST amount and SGST amount classified in their bills. Are we liable to claim CGST and SGST against the said bills. Kalpesh Daftary – Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan – The Reply = Sir, According to Section 12 (3) (b) of IGST Act, 2017, the place of supply of services by way of lodging accommodation by a hotel, inn, guest house, home stay, club or campsite, by whatever name called, and including a house boat or any other vessel shall be the location at which the immovable property or boat or vessel, as the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e to take credit in this situation. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Dear Experts,In this case, for my knowledge, can the person take ITC of CGST ignoring SGST?Thanks – Reply By Himansu Sekhar – The Reply = Please look into the Sec. 49(4) of SGST Act,2017 wherein it is written that: (4) The amount available in the credit ledger may be used for payment towards the output tax under this Act…….. It means MGST is different from GGST. The MGST cannot be utilised for GGST. The tax invoice issued under Sec. 31 of MGST Act, will not be valid document for taking credit under Sec. 16 of the GGST Act. Also there is no provision that CGST paid in one state will be carried to another state. For that purpose IGST is specified. The clarification i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – SAFETAB LIFESCIENCE – Dated:- 10-7-2018 Last Replied Date:- 11-7-2018 – Dear Experts, Our Directors/Managers visiting outstation on business trip . Please clarify whether we are eligible for ITC for the following cases.1. IGST charged on Lodging Bills of Other state hotels.2. IGST charged on Food Bills of Other state hotels.3. CGST + SGST charged on Lodging Bills of Local state Hotels where our GST registration is held. 4. CGST + SGST charged on Food Bills of Local state bills where our GST registration is held. – Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan – The Reply = Sir, According to Section 12 (3) (b) of IGST Act, 2017, the place of supply of services by way of lodging accommodation by a hotel, inn, guest

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

person is an un-registered person . Therefore, in view of the above hotel owners in a State are liable to charge /cgst and SGST and not IGST though their customers belong to other State. According to Section 49 (5) (e) & (f) of CGST Act, 2017 the amount of input tax credit available in the electronic credit ledger of the registered person on account of the central tax shall not be utilised towards payment of State tax or Union territory tax and the State tax or Union territory tax shall not be utilised towards payment of central tax. In view of the above my view is that you cannot avail the credit of said taxes paid. – Reply By SAFETAB LIFESCIENCE – The Reply = Dear Sir, In response to the reply received by me, I am stating that I am ve

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tration. The food bill is not eligible for credit as it falls under personal consumption which is excluded in Sec 17(5) of CGST Act. The hotel cannot charge IGST. The provision stated by Sri Rajagopalan Sir supports this view. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Admissibility of ITC depends on the major factor whether IGST is applicable or CGST & SGST and applicable of these taxes depends upon the determination of place of supply. In my view in this regard, Rule of thumb is as under:- (i) If there is movement of goods from one State to another State IGST is applicable. Similarly, if there is a movement of services from one State to another State IGST is applicable barring some situation i.e. Renting of Immovable property etc.. The fa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (7) TMI 995 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI – Refund of Interest – Time limitation – discharge of duty in terms of Section 3A of Central Excise Act, 1944 under Compounded Levy Scheme – whether the same would be hit by the bar of limitation or not? – Held that:- The present appellant did not keep the matter alive by filing any appeal against the confirmation of interest or deposit of the same. All the refunds, have to be claimed in terms of Section 11 B of the Act, which prescribed a period within which such claims should have been filed by an assessee, subject to some exceptions. Admittedly in the present matter, the appellant’s case is not covered by such exceptions like payment of duty under protest or the assessments being provisionally.
–
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Porcelain Electrical Mfg. [1994 (11) TMI 145 – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has held that the authorities working under the Act are bound by the provisions of the Act and are required to decide the disputes i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

on record appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Pan Masala and Chewing Tobacco and were discharging their duty liability in terms of Section 3A of Central Excise Act, 1944 under Compounded Levy Scheme, in terms of Pan Masala Packing Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 and Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2010. During the period of dispute i.e., March 2011 to July, 2013 and May, 2013 to November, 2013, the appellant discharged their duty obligation by 5th of the following month in which clearances have taken place. Such duty was discharged along with payment of interest from the 5th of the same month upto the date of payment of duty. 3. It is also seen that an identical situation arrive in the appellant s Delhi Unit where the appellant claimed that no interest liability would arise against them. In such a situation the matter travelled upto Tribunal, who vide their Fin

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e Revenue cannot be allowed to retain the said illegal levy, without any authority of law and should have refunded the same to the assessee, without raising the issue of limitation. 6. I find no merit in the above pleas of the appellant. Admittedly the refunds have not arisen as a consequence of passing the orders by the Tribunal, in the appellant s own unit which is located in Kanpur. It has to be seen that the present appeals are by the appellant in respect of their Kanpur Unit wherein no litigation was going on in respect of payment of interest. The appellant, after paying the interest, kept quite and did not challenge the same before any Higher Appellate Forum. The only challenge was by their Delhi Unit and the orders passed by the Tribunal were in respect of Delhi Unit only vide which the interest was held, has not payable. No doubt the Tribunal declared the law, which has to be held as law in rem and has to be applied and followed in respect of other assessees , similarly situate

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Porcelain Electrical Mfg. reported at 1998 (98) ELT 583 (S.C.) has held that the authorities working under the Act are bound by the provisions of the Act and are required to decide the disputes in terms of the law provided in the said Act. The decision of various High Courts allowing the refunds even beyond the limitation period on by applying the general law of limitation are in exercise of their extraordinary jurisdiction, which is not available to the Revenue Authorities. Tribunal being creature of the Act, is bound by the provisions of the Act and even though the appellant s refund claim of interest is admissible on merits, in view of law declared by the Tribunal in the above referred decisions, the same having been filed after the normal period of one year provided under Section 11 B, is hit by the bar of limitation. Accordingly, I am of the view that the Lower Authorities have rightly rejected the same. 8. In view of the foregoing discussio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (7) TMI 1098 – HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT – TMI – Principles of Natural Justice – petitioner’s prayer for quashing the impugned order for the reason that principles of natural justice stood violated – Held that:- The authority below has to adjudicate the factual matrix and the parties, if so aggrieved, can resort to the appropriate statutory remedy – petition disposed off on the terms as mutually agreed. – CWP No. 2505 of 2017 Dated:- 10-7-2018 – MR. SANJAY KAROL, AND MR. AJAY MOHAN GOEL, JJ. For the petitioner: Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Charu Bhatnagar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. Ranjan, Sharma, Mr. Adarsh Sharma and Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Additional Advocate Generals

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

correct. It is humbly submitted that the Budgetary support refund is being processed and disbursed to the applicants as per funds allocated to this office of the replying respondents by the DIPP It is mentioned that DIPP has only once allocated limited funds to the department for disbursal that too in the last week of March 2018 and accordingly amount has been disbursed against only a few of the refund applications filed with the department. Due to non-allocation of sufficient funds by the DIPP to the department, applications for budgetary support refunds including application filed by the petitioner are pending with department. Now DIPP has released additional funds for disbursal of budgetary support refunds which is under process of alloc

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

l concerned. 4. This statement is being made in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, for the authority below has to adjudicate the factual matrix and the parties, if so aggrieved, can resort to the appropriate statutory remedy. 5. Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, learned Senior Advocate has no objection the said proposition, subject to the appropriate authority deciding the matter, in the light of the averments made in para 8 of the reply/affidavit, reproduced supra. 6. Under these circumstances, as mutually agreed, present petition is disposed in the following terms. (a) For the reason that the impugned order dated 26.9.2017, (Annexure P15), passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division Baddi, Distrit Solan, HP (responde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (7) TMI 1329 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (15) G. S. T. L. 484 (All.) – Seizure of goods – Section 129 (3) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 – Held that:- An interim protection is granted to the petitioner by directing for release of the seized goods along with the vehicle on furnishing of bank guarantee to the tune of ₹ 5,00000/ goods and vehicle are released forthwith on furnishing of bank guarantee.
–
Constitution of appellate Tribunal – case of petitioner is that it is only the union to constitute the appellate Tribunal and not alone the State of U.P. – Held that:- This Court finds that in any case the constitution of the Tribunal is necessary and in this regard earlier also this Court has issued the directions for the constitution of the Tribunal – Surprisingly even after completion of one year from the date of introduction of the GST no appellate Tribunal has been constituted.
–
Case listed for hearing next as on 2.8.2018. – Writ Tax No. 942 of 2018 Dated:- 10-7-201

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t the petitioner is a seller, has affected certain sales of M.S. Bar to a registered dealer situated at Jhansi, namely M/s. Jhansi Enterprises, Shivpuri Road, Jhansi against the tax invoice dated 16.05.2018. In the tax invoice the value of the commodity was shown to the tune of ₹ 6,02,352/- and the IGST (Integrated Goods and Service Tax) has been charged @ 18% to the tune of ₹ 1,08,423.36/-. After the issuance of the tax invoice the goods are handed over to the transporter namely Hindustan Transport Company for transportation from Mandi Gobindgarh Sahib, Punjab to Jhansi, U.P. On 17.05.2018 at 11.50 pm the goods are intercepted by the respondent no. 4 and a detention memo has been issued in which it has been mentioned that the goods though were accompanying the documents but it was not accompanying the E-way bill. On the basis of the aforesaid discrepancy the seizure proceedings are carried out and a penalty order under Section129 (3) dated 22.05.2018 was passed. Against th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

onstitution of the Tribunal is necessary and in this regard earlier also this Court has issued the directions for the constitution of the Tribunal. Surprisingly even after completion of one year from the date of introduction of the GST no appellate Tribunal has been constituted. Let the Principal Secretary (Tax and Institutional Registration) Civil Secretariat, Lucknow may file his personal affidavit by providing all details with regard to non establishment of the Tribunal till date and the steps taken by the respondent authorities. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the documents, an interim protection is granted to the petitioner by directing for release of the seized goods along with the vehicle on furnishing of bank guarantee to the tune of ₹ 5,00000/-. Let the goods and vehicle be released forthwith on furnishing of bank guarantee as indicated herein above. Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is allowed two weeks' time to file counte

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – G.O. Ms. No. 79 – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – NOTIFICATIONS BY GOVERNMENT COMMERCIAL TAXES AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT [G.O. Ms. No. 79, Commercial Taxes and Registration (B1), 10th July 2018, Aani 26, Vilambi, Thiruvalluvar Aandu-2049.] No.II(2)/CTR/591(e)/2018. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Tamil Nadu Act 19 of 2017) and in supersession of the Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Notification No.II(2)/CTR/562(b)/2017, published in Part II-Section 2 of the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette Extraordinary, dated the 14th July, 2017, the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby appoints the following classes of officers appointed under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (8) TMI 783 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI – Refund claim – duty paid under protest – time limitation – Held that:- Every refund application has to pass through the bar of limitation in terms of the provisions of section 11B of the Central Excise Act. However, as per exceptions carved out in the said section, the limitation would not apply if the duty stands paid under protest or the assessments are provisional.
–
The appellant have taken a categorical stand that the reversal was being done by them after lodging their protest vide letter dated 05.06.2009. If that be so, the limitation would not apply – However, neither of the authorities below have referred to and considered the said protest letter filed by the appellants.
–
Matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for re-consideration in the light of the protest filed by the assessee – appeal allowed by way of remand. – E/70256/2018-EX[SM] – A/71369/2018-SM[BR] – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER(J

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ity is not excisable goods, the provisions of Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules would not apply as regards the sale of electricity. It is seen that the said order of the Hon ble Supreme Court reported in 2015 (322) ELT 769 (SC) was followed by the Commissioner in the assessee s own case and vide Order-in-Original dated 17.11.2016, the demand raised against the assessee on the said ground was dropped. 3. As a consequence of dropping of demand, the appellant filed a refund claim on 01.12.2016, to the extent of ₹ 30,02,178/-. While adjudicating the said refund claim, the original adjudicating authority allowed the same to the extent of ₹ 26,23,605/- and rejected the amount of refund of amounting to ₹ 3,78,573/- on the ground that the same pertains to the period 2007-08 and 2008-09 and inasmuch as the said period was not covered by the order dated 17.11.2016 of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Hapur, the same is not refundable to the appellant. 4. Being aggrieved wi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e by filing a protest letter dated 05.06.2009. The appellant was reversing proportionate credit on the inputs after an objection raised by the audit and after filing of the protest letter in question. It is their contention that inasmuch as the issue now stands decided in their favour, on merits, the said refund has to be granted to them. 6. After carefully considering the submissions made by both the sides I find that every refund application has to pass through the bar of limitation in terms of the provisions of section 11B of the Central Excise Act. However, as per exceptions carved out in the said section, the limitation would not apply if the duty stands paid under protest or the assessments are provisional. The appellant have taken a categorical stand that the reversal was being done by them after lodging their protest vide letter dated 05.06.2009. If that be so, the limitation would not apply. However, neither of the authorities below have referred to and considered the said pro

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (8) TMI 784 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI – Clandestine removal – MS bars – Revenue entertained a view that the higher figures reflected in ER-4 return is the correct clearance from the appellant’s factory and the difference has been cleared without payment of duty, in a clandestine manner – Held that:- Apart from the said difference, there is virtually no other evidence on record to show any clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods. Even if the assessee’s explanation is not accepted it has to be appreciated that both the figures stand given in the two returns by the appellants themselves. The charges of clandestine removal are required to be produced by the Revenue and onus is heavily placed upon them. No efforts stand made by the Revenue to further investigate the matter and collect evidence of any clandestine activities – demand set aside.
–
CENVAT Credit – duty paying invoices – credit availed on the basis of photocopies of the invoices issued by the input supplier – H

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

engaged in the manufacture of MS bars, on the allegations and findings of clandestine activities. 2. Out of the said demand, duty of ₹ 20,30,646/-(Rupees Twenty Lakhs Thirty Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Six only) stands confirmed against the appellant by comparing the figure of clearances as reflected by them in their ER-1 records and as shown in ER-4 returns for the period 2010-11. Inasmuch as there is a difference in the clearance figures shown by the appellant themselves in the said two returns, Revenue entertained a view that the higher figures reflected in ER-4 return is the correct clearance from the appellant s factory and the difference has been cleared without payment of duty, in a clandestine manner. Though the appellant explained that ER-4 returns stand filed by them on the basis of their balance sheets, which includes sales from various branches as also some other activities of the assessee and ER-1 figures are the correct figures, the lower authorities have not ac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

them the benefit of Cenvat credit of duty on the ground that the same stands availed on the basis of photocopies of the invoices issued by the input supplier. As explained by the ld.Advocate input supplier as also the appellant are falling under the same division and the input supplier have got the photocopies of the invoices certified by their range Inspector to the effect that the said inputs stand cleared by the manufacturer on payment of duty. In addition, the returns filed by the said manufacturer as also the challans issued by them stand produced. In such a scenario, denial of credit on a hyper-technical ground, in the absence of any allegation of non-receipt of goods by the assessee, is not called for. Accordingly that part of the impugned order is also set aside. In view of the above, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeal is allowed in toto. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.) – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Management India – taxmanage

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (8) TMI 810 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI – Maintainability of appeal – appeal dismissed on the ground of non-deposit of 7.5% of the confirmed duty demand against the appellant – Section 35F of CEA – Held that:- The appellants have now deposited 10% for the purpose of filling the appeal before the Tribunal. As such the condition of Section 35F for deposit of 7.5% before Commissioner (Appeals) stands satisfied – matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits. – COD Application No.ST/COD/70184/2018 In APPEAL No.ST/70426/2018-ST[SM] – A/71380/2018-SM[BR] – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Shri Kartikeya Narain, Adv for Appellant Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, (Asstt. Commr.) AR, for Respondent ORDER

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (8) TMI 811 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI – Refund of Service Tax paid – denial on the ground of unjust enrichment – bottling of alcoholic liquor conceived as Business Auxiliary Services and tax was erroneously paid – section 11B of the Central Excise Act – Held that:- The said certificate dated 09.12.2017 was not before the authorities below and as such does not stand considered by them. Inasmuch as the said certificate is an important document, the appellant should be given an opportunity to place the same before the lower authorities and to re-decide the issue by taking the said certificate into consideration – appeal allowed by wya of remand. – ST/70029 & 70030/2018-ST[SM] – A/71382-71383/2018-SM[BR] – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – MRS. ARCHANA

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ppellants filed refund claims for the same vide their two separate applications dated 05.10.2015. 2. The lower authorities held the refunds to have been filed well within time as also allowed the same on merits, but rejected it on the ground of unjust enrichment. On an appeal against the order of the original adjudicating authority, Commissioner (Appeals) modified the order of the lower authorities and held that the refund amounts have to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund as provided under section 11B of the Central Excise Act, instead of giving it to the appellant as the same would be hit by the bar of unjust enrichment. 3. On going through the said order of Commissioner(Appeals) I note that he has made a reference to the Hon ble Su

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

act that Service Tax was shown separately in the invoices and subsequently by way of credit notes, was refunded to the customer M/s. United Spirits on whose behalf they are manufacturing the spirits. He submits that the price of the alcohol is fixed by the state govt. in which case the manufacturer and seller of the spirits is required to sell the goods at the fixed price, irrespective of the fact that whether Service Tax has been paid or not. In such a scenario the factum of collection of Service Tax from the ultimate buyer does not arise. For the above proposition ld. Advocate relies upon the Tribunal decision in the case of Tamralipta Co-Op. Spinning Mill Ltd. v. Commr. Of C.Ex., Calcutta-II [2003 (162) E.L.T. 840 (Tri.-Kolkata)] Ld. Adv

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. SELFSHINE POLYMERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Versus STATE OF KERLA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE STATE TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR, GST CELL AND FACILITATION CENTER, GST COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON, NEW DELHI, THE NODAL OFFICER FOR STATE GST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE COMMISSIONER, GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 2018 (8) TMI 974 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI – Input tax credit – migration to GST Regime – unable to upload FORM GST TRAN-1 within the stipulated time – Held that:- The Ext.P14 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.” – Not onl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rated to the Goods and Services Tax regime. To use the input tax available to his credit at the time of migration, the petitioner had to upload FORM GST TRAN-1 within the stipulated time. He asserts that though he attempted to upload it within the time, he failed because of some system error. The petitioner, therefore, seeks directions to enable him to take credit of the available input tax. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader, besides perusing the record. 3. The Ext.P14 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 th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the due process of law. 5.4 These applications shall be collated by the nodal officer and forwarded to GSTN who would on receipt of application examine the same. GSTN shall after verifying its electronic records and the applications received, identify the issue involved where a large section of tax payers are affected. GSTN shall forward the same to the IT Grievance Redressal Committee with suggested solutions for resolution of the problem. (italics supplied) 4. Not only the petitioner 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 th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – SRO 303 – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR FINANCE DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION NO. SRO 303 (JAMMU & KASHMIR), DATED 10-7-2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No. V of 2017), the State Government, on the recommendations of the Council hereby make the following rules further to amend the Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- (i) in rule 58, after sub-rule (1), the following sub-rule shall be inserted, namely:- "(1A) For the purposes of Chapter XVI of these rules, a transporter who is registered in more than one State or Union Territory having the same Permanent Account Number, may apply for a uniqu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tend 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 58(1A)] Application for obtaining unique common enrolment number [Only for transporters registered in more than one State or Union Territory having the same PAN] 1. (a) Legal name (

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 902 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Penalty – SSI Exemption – use of Brand Name of others – only allegation against the appellant is that they dealt with the goods on which duty was not discharged – Held that:- The penalties imposed under Rule 26 are excessive and requires interference – the penalties imposed on M/s. Raj Ganesh Enterprises is reduced from ₹ 5,00,000/- to ₹ 1,50,000/-; M/s. Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. is reduced from ₹ 5,00,000/- to ₹ 1,50,000/- and M/s. Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. is reduced from ₹ 1,00,000/- to ₹ 50,000/ Appeal allowed in part. – Appeal No. E/42019 to 42021/2017 – Final Order Nos. 41966-41968/2018 – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) Shri G. Natarajan, Advocate for the Appellants Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Brief facts are that M/s. Sri Ganapathi Marketing and M/s. Annapoorani Industries were engaged in manufacture and clearance of wet grinders in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

apoorani Industries E/42021/2017 Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Rs.5,00,000/- Sri Ganapathi Marketing 3. He submitted that the brand name Sowbaghya belonged to M/s. Raj Ganesh Enterprises for a limited period upto March 2012 and thereafter it was assigned to Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. In fact, the other units like Sri Ganapathi Marketing and Annapoorani Industries were engaged to manufacture the wet grinders with Sowbaghya brand name but they were properly instructed to conduct the manufacturing activity in a rural area. In contrast to the instruction given by the appellant, the said units started the manufacturing activity outside the rural area and therefore the demands were raised against these units. It is submitted by him that the main appellants on whom the duty demand has been confirmed that is Sri Ganapathi Marketing and Annapoorani Industries have not filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) and also before the Tribunal to his knowledge. He submitted that the said unit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

dealt with the goods on which duty was not discharged. Taking into consideration the facts of the situation, I am of the opinion that the penalties imposed under Rule 26 are excessive and requires interference. I hold that the penalties imposed on M/s. Raj Ganesh Enterprises in Appeal No. E/42019/2017 is reduced from ₹ 5,00,000/- to ₹ 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only); M/s. Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. in Appeal No. E/42021/2017 is reduced from ₹ 5,00,000/- to ₹ 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) and M/s. Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. in Appeal No. E/42020/2017 is reduced from ₹ 1,00,000/- to ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only). 7. The impugned order is modified to the above extent without interfering in the remaining portion of the order. The appeals are partly allowed in the above manner. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Management India – taxmanagem

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 915 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Refund of Unutilized Input Service – Export of Services – Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 – Refund rejected on the ground of limitation – Held that:- The issue as to how the period of limitation has to be computed in the case of export of service has been settled by the decision in the case of mPortal India Wireless Solutions Pvt. Ltd. [2011 (9) TMI 450 – KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], wherein it is held that date of FIRCs has to be taken as the relevant date for computing the period of one year for filing the refund claim – rejection of refund claim on the ground of limitation is unjustified – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal No. ST/41185/2017 – Final Order No. 41965/2018 – Dat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ejected the refund claim, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence this appeal. 2. None appeared for the appellant, though notice of hearing was issued. On 22.5.2018, the matter was posted for hearing to today i.e. 10.7.2018 as last chance. Still there is no appearance for the appellant. The matter is therefore taken up for disposal after hearing the ld. AR for Revenue and on perusal of records. 3. The appellant has stated in the grounds of appeal that the department has wrongly rejected the refund claim on the ground of limitation. The period of one year has to be computed from the date of receipt of FIRC and not the date of invoice in the case of export of goods. They have relied on the judgment of the Hon ble Karnataka High

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

have applied the decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore Vs. GTN Engineering (I) Ltd. – 2012 (281) ELT 185 (Mad.). The issue as to how the period of limitation has to be computed in the case of export of service has been settled by the decision in the case of mPortal India Wireless Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (supra) relied by the appellant in their appeal memorandum, wherein it is held that date of FIRCs has to be taken as the relevant date for computing the period of one year for filing the refund claim. Further, the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bengaluru Vs. Span Infotech (India) Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2018 (12) GSTL 200 (Tri. LB) has also recently held that in the case of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 1118 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – input services – rent-a-cab services for the period April 2011 to May 2011 – Held that:- For the period for which the services have been consumed is shown as prior to 1.4.2011. However, this fact has to be verified for which, it is fit to remand the matter to the adjudicating authority, who shall consider the issue whether the services have been availed by the appellant prior to 1.4.2011 and also consider the applicability of the decision relied by the ld. counsel for appellant – appeal allowed by way of remand. – Appeal No. E/42186/2017 – Final Order No. 41969/2018 – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) Ms. Vishnu Priya, Advocate for the Appellant Shri B.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

iya submitted that the rent-a-cab services were availed by the appellant for picking up and dropping the employees. The authorities below have denied the credit holding that credit has been consumed which was availed by the appellant after 1.4.2011. In fact, the services were consumed by the appellant prior to 1.4.2011 and as per various decisions of the High Courts as well as the Tribunal, the said credit is eligible. She relied upon the Master Circular of the Board No.943/04/2011-CX dated 29.4.2011 and argued that the Board has clarified that if the provision of services is prior to 1.4.2011, then the credit which is availed after the said date is eligible. She adverted to the various invoices and pointed out that though the payments were

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ied that if the services have been availed prior to 1.4.2011, even though credit is availed after, the same would be eligible. The Tribunal in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut reported in 2015 (38) STR 855 was relied by the ld. counsel for the appellant to argue that when the services have been availed prior to 1.4.2011, even though the payments are received after the said date, credit is eligible. The ld. counsel has also furnished copies of the invoices. On going through the same, I find that for the period for which the services have been consumed is shown as prior to 1.4.2011. However, this fact has to be verified for which, I deem it fit to remand the matter to the adjudicating authorit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 1140 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Time limitation – Short-payment of service tax – Held that:- It is seen that the contention of the appellant that they have not received the copy of the order and that they applied to the Assistant Commissioner on 28.9.2015 is not supported by any probable evidence – Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation – Appeal dismissed. – Appeal No. ST/40540/2018 – Final Order No. 41970/2018 – Dated:- 10-7-2018 – Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) Ms. Sindhuja, Advocate for the Appellant Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Brief facts are that the appellants were issued show cause notice for short-payment of service tax and after due process

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the appeal on the ground of limitation. 3. The ld. AR Shri B. Balamurugan supported the findings in the impugned order. He furnished a copy of the letter by the concerned Commissionerate stating that Order-in-Original dated 25.3.2015 was dispatched by registered post to the appellant on9.4.2015. The acknowledgment also shows that the appellant has received the same. However, the appellant has filed the appeal with much delay of more than six months only on 12.10.2015. That the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeal as being time-barred. He relied upon the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur – 2008 (221) ELT 163 (SC). 4. Heard both sides. 5. The

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ich shows the signature and stamp of the appellant. However, no date is endorsed by the appellant while receiving the copy of the order. In any case, when the order has been dispatched on 9.4.2015, the same ought to have been delivered to the assessee at Thiruvander Koil, Puducherry. It would take only a maximum of ten days. The O/o Assistant Commissioner as well as the address of the assessee is within Puducherry limits. Thus, it is seen that the contention of the appellant that they have not received the copy of the order and that they applied to the Assistant Commissioner on 28.9.2015 is not supported by any probable evidence. I am of the view the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation. The dec

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 1480 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – Refund claim – refund was claimed for the non-operative period of the machine during the month that was found 3rd May, 2016 to 31st May, 2016 – refund rejected on the ground that N/N. 17/2007-CE does not have any provision with regard to reduction in the amount of the duty to be deposited even if a particular machine become inoperative during the period of any month – Compounded Levy Scheme.
–
Held that:- The matter is no longer res-integra as it has already been decided in the case of Jupiter Industries vs. CCE, Jaipur [2006 (4) TMI 164 – HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR], where it was held that The direction of the Tribunal to refund excess amount received in respect of machine which had ceased to function during the month of July to August also does not call for any interference.
–
Since in this case one machine being inoperative for the month of after payment of central excise duty; has not produced any goods an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

al excise duty of ₹ 3,60,000/- @ ₹ 40,000/- per cold rolled Patta Patti machine for the 9 machines which were installed in the factory premises of the appellant. The assessee/appellant vide his letter dated 02/05/2016 informed the Office of Superintendent, Central Excise Range, Jodhpur that one of the cold rolled Patta Patti machine will not be functional for the rest of the month. The Jurisdictional Range Office vide their letter No. CE/20/07/PSL/00/446 dated 03/05/2016 granted the permission for keeping the one cold rolled machine inoperative. 2. The appellant has filed for refund of the duty for the non-operative period of the machine during the month that was found 3rd May, 2016 to 31st May, 2016 and the refund claim of ₹ 37,419/- was filed with the concerned Assistant Commissioner. The Adjudicating Authority namely the Divisional Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claim of ₹ 37,419/- on the ground that Notification No. 17/2007-CE does not have any p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

duty on pro-rata basis for the working days is not available under the scheme. It has been the argument of the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant that the stand taken by the Department for rejected their refund claims is not legally sustainable. It has been submitted that Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provides that duty of Central Excise is leviable on the manufacture of excisable goods and the Department can only collect Central excise duty on the machines manufacturing excisable goods. It is argued that even under the compounded levy scheme of Central excise duty, the machines which are non-functional cannot put for charging excise duty. The learned Advocate has cited several judgments of the higher courts including a judgment in the case of Jupiter Industries vs. CCE, Jaipur – 2001 (137) E.L.T. 1018 (Tri.), wherein it has been provided that the refund of excess central excise duty paid need to be refunded in case the machine remains inoperative. It has further

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he machine became inoperative on 2nd May, 2016 and by that time advance central excise duty for the month of May, 2016 was already deposited for all the 9 machines and therefore it resulted in excess payment of amount of ₹ 37,419/-. The appellant have filed the refund of the same which was got rejected by the Assistant Commissioner on the ground that Notification No. 17/2007-CE dated 01/03/2007 does not have any provision for refund of duty deposited in advance once the assessee have started availing the assessment of duty under the compounded levy scheme. 6. The matter is no longer res-integra as it has already been decided in the case of Jupiter Industries vs. CCE, Jaipur (supra) and in the case of ACME Industries vs. CCE, Jaipur – II – 2011 (269) E.L.T. 523 (Tri. – Del.). 7. The relevant extract of the relevant paras of Hon ble Rajasthan High Court order in case of CCE, Jaipur – II vs. Jupiter Industries – 2006 (206) E.L.T. 1195 (Raj.) is reproduced here below :- 23. It goes w

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

in relation to the machine which was not in existence, the question of passing on duty to consumers of existing goods can arise so as to require the invocation of principle of unjust enrichment to deny refund. Therefore, there is no justification for taking the view that since the tax has been paid under the special provision it is not subject to refund. Refund is a consequence of recovery of duty which is not leviable under the provisions of taxing statute or of excess payment of Duty. In given circumstances, such excess collection of Duty may be refused to be refunded, if it results in unjust enrichment because passing of duty to buyers of goods. It depends on furnishing satisfactory proof by the manufacturer that such duty has been passed on to buyers. However, in case like the present where goods have not at all been manufactured and yet on estimated basis of imaginary production Duty has been demanded, the question of passing of such duty collected from the assessee to buyers of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 1721 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Reverse Charge Mechanism – Supply of Tangible Goods Service or deemed sale – Department took the view that the foreign lessor has supplied tangible goods to appellants on lease; that lessor therefore rendered “Supply of Tangible Goods Service” as per section 65 (105) (zzzzj) of Finance Act, 1994; hence appellant as recipient of service are liable to pay service tax on reverse charge basis – Section 66A read with Rule 2 (1) (d) (iv) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 – non-inclusion of TDS amount in taxable value – wrong availment of Credit in respect of excise duty paid on motor vehicles – penalties.
–
Held that:- The lease agreement between EAT and the appellant is one wherein the right of possession and control of the aircraft has been bestowed on the appellant and not retained with the lessor. This being so, the ingredients of “Supply of Tangible Goods Service” requiring exigibility to service tax by the Finance Act, 1994 are not present in th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed to be treated as deemed sale of goods, hence cannot be considered as supply of tangible goods for use of service for the purposes of Section 65(105) (zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994 for the period upto 01-07-2012 or as taxable service for the purpose of Section 65B (44) of the Finance Act, 1994 after 01-07-2012.
–
It was also held in the case that the terms and conditions stipulated in the agreement, lead to the conclusion that the transaction envisaged in the agreement is one of transfer of right to use which is a deemed sale under Section 2(24) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002. The Finance Ministers speech and the budget instructions issued by the C.B.E. & C. also clarify that if VAT is payable on the transaction, then service tax levy is not attracted.
–
The assessees activity of giving various equipments on hire does not fall under the category of Supply of tangible goods for use, hence the same is not liable to service tax w.e.f. 16.05.2008.
–
Penalties i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

L) for ferrying cargo and documents to different parts of the country. Appellants acquired on lease, aircraft from foreign company for transportation of cargo. The aircraft is operated by appellant with their own crew. Maintenance and repair of aircrafts is also done by the appellants. The department took the view that the foreign lessor has supplied tangible goods to appellants on lease; that lessor therefore rendered Supply of Tangible Goods Service as per section 65 (105) (zzzzj) of Finance Act, 1994; hence appellant as recipient of service are liable to pay service tax on reverse charge basis amounting to ₹ 1,53,13,956/- for the period May 2008 to October 2008. 2.2 Appellants were paying service tax on maintenance or repair service, Online information and Database retrieval service on reverse charge basis as recipient of service on a value net of TDS amount. Department took the view that for the purposes of payment of service tax under provisions of Section 66A read with Rule

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

640/- with interest for the period July 2009 to September 2010 on supply of Tangible Goods Service‟. 2.6 Yet another SCN dt. 29.08.2011 was issued on the very same issue, inter alia proposing demand of service tax liability of ₹ 1,88,99,721/- with interest thereon and under Supply of Tangible Goods Service along with proposal to impose penalty. 2.7 In adjudication, proposals in the SCNs were confirmed with interest and penalties imposed against which orders, appellants have filed these appeals as per the following table : Appeal No. Period Tax Demand (INR) Penalty demand Category of services / Allegation Whether limitation period invoked Appeal No.ST/186/2011 May 2008 to October 2008 1,53,13,956 Rs.200 per day or 2% of the service tax demand per month whichever is higher subject to maximum of service tax payable Supply of tangible goods Yes July 2005 to October 2008 – Rs.2,71,106 under Section 78 Non inclusion of TDS in the value of consideration paid to the lessor of aircr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

.100 per day or 1% of the service tax demand per month whichever is higher subject to maximum of service tax payable for period 8 April 2011 to 31 March 2012, under Section 76 Supply of tangible goods No Appeal No.ST/41211-212/2016 April 2012 to March 2014 18,55,94,522 Rs.1.85 crores under Section 76 and ₹ 10,000 under Section 77 Supply of tangible goods and declared services No Appeal No.41244/2018 April 2014 to September 2015 12,28,53,085 Rs.60 lakhs under Section 76 Transfer of goods by way of leasing without transfer of right to use such goods No Appeal No.41245/2018 October 2015 to June 2017 16,99,14,559 Rs.80 lakhs under Section 76 Transfer of goods by way of leasing without transfer of right to use such goods No 64,99,17,543 3. When the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of the appellants, Ld. Sr. Advocate Shri N. Venkatraman, assisted by Shri Akhil Suresh, Advocate submitted copy of the lease agreement between DHL Aviation, Netherlands (lessor) and the appellant (lesse

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

been clarified by the Board in their Circular No.334/1/2008-TRU dt. 29.02.2008. It is clarified in para 4.4.3 of the said circular that proposal to levy service tax on such services provided is in relation to supply of tangible goods for use, with no legal right or possession or effective control. 3.3 Ld. Advocate placed reliance on the following case laws : (1) Power Mak Industries Vs CCE Hyderabad 2018-TIOL-1352-CESTAT-HYD (2) GIMMCO Ltd. Vs CCE & ST Nagpur – 2017 (48) STR 476 (Tri.-Mumbai) (3) Heligo Charters Pvt. Ltd. Vs CST Mumabi-VI 2017-TIOL-2831-CESTAT-MUM. 4) International Seaport Dredging Ltd. Vs CST Chennai Final Order No.40236-40238/2018 dt. 30.01.2018 3.4 With regard to demand in respect of cenvat credit of ₹ 4,92,474/- taken in respect of motor cars, the appellants are not contesting the said demand. However, the appellants were under a belief that they were entitled to avail cenvat credit of vehicles other than motor cars. Only on that basis, the appellants mis

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

1,106/- only on the bonafide belief that the TDS amount is not required to be included in the value for assessment. For this reason, the imposition of penalty on that score is also not justified and may be set aside. 4.1 On the other hand, Ld. A.R supports the impugned order. He draws our attention to Article 5 of the lease agreement where it is mandated that appellant being lessee shall not sub-lease, assign or otherwise transfer or relinquish possession or control of any item of equipment or any part thereof without prior written consent of foreign lessor. This very clear condition laid down in the agreement indicates that the possession and control of the aircraft was at all times with the foreign lessor and not with the lessee. Hence all ingredients of Supply of Tangible Goods Service as defined in Finance Act, 1994 were satisfied. Adjudicating authorities in all these impugned orders have therefore correctly confirmed the said demands under this service. 4.2 Ld. A.R also draws our

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

plicable provisions were very much imposable on the appellant. 5. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts of the case. 6. We intend to take up the issues one by one. The main bone of contention in all these appeals concerns demand under Supply of Tangible Goods Service‟ in respect of aircraft taken on lease by the appellants. The department has taken a stand that the terms of lease satisfies the requirements of Supply of Tangible Goods Service as defined in Section 65 (105) (zzzzj) of the Act. Ld. A.R has been at pains to draw our attention to the finding of the adjudicating authority that M/s. EAT who had supposedly leased the aircraft of the appellant were themselves a lessee and that they had leased same aircraft from Boeing Capital Corporation (BCC). 7. We have perused the lease agreement between BCC and EAT (available on page 132 of paper book) dt. 05.02.2002 – One used Boeing Model 757-236 Aircraft . No doubt, as per Article 5 (a), EAT shall not sublease, assign or

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n particular, the operation of the aircraft with the personnel of the appellant themselves, requirement of maintenance of aircraft by the appellants etc., we have no doubt in our mind that the lease agreement between EAT and the appellant is one wherein the right of possession and control of the aircraft has been bestowed on the appellant and not retained with the lessor. This being so, the ingredients of Supply of Tangible Goods Service requiring exigibility to service tax by the Finance Act, 1994 are not present in this transaction. In consequence, the monetary consideration paid by the appellants to EAT cannot be considered as value of Supply of Tangible Goods Service and tax demanded on the same as has been done in the impugned orders. 8.2 We also find that the case laws relied upon by the Ld. Advocate fully support his case. The Tribunal in Power Mak Industries -2018-TIOL-1352-CESAT-HYD, in which one of the Members here was also a party to the decision, held as under : 6.1) Heard

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

use, without transferring right of possession and effective control of such machinery, equipment and appliances. This service was introduced w.e.f. 16-05-2008. In the letter No. 334/1/2008 TRU, dated 29-02-2008, the CBEC while clarifying the changes in service tax proposed in Budget 2008-2009, in para 4.4 conveyed the following clarification to proposed new taxable service provided in relation to supply of tangible goods: 4.4.3 Proposal is to levy service tax on such services provided in relation to supply of tangible goods, including machinery, equipment and appliances, for use, with no legal right of possession or effective control. Supply of tangible goods for use and leviable to VAT/sales tax as deemed sale of goods, is not conveyed under the scope of the proposed service. Whether a transaction involves transfer of possession and control is a question of facts and is to be decided based on the terms of the contract and other material facts. This could be ascertainable from the fac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ct, of property in any goods for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration; (b) a tax on the transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some other form) invoked in the execution of a works contract; (c) a tax on the delivery of goods on hire purchase or any system of payment by instalments; (d) a tax on the transfer of the right to use any goods for any purpose (whether or not for a specified period) for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration; (e) a tax on the supply of goods by any unincorporated association or body of persons to a member thereof for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration; (f) a tax on the supply, by way of or as part of any service or in any other manner whatsoever, of goods, being food or any other article for human consumption or any drink (whether or not intoxicating), where such supply or service, is for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration, and such transfer, delivery or supply of any good

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of right of goodsinvolves transfer of possession and effective control over such goods. Transfer of goods without transfer of possession and effective control over goods would not be a sale but a service (such transfer has also been declared as a service under section 66F of the Act). 6.5) For the post 01-07-2012 scenario, CBEC issued compendium of circulars on 20-06-2012 under the title TAXATION OF SERVICES AN EDUCATION GUIDE. In para 6.6.1, the CBEC clarified that transfer of right of goods involves transfer of possession and effective control over such goods and reproduced the following tests laid by Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited vs. Union of India [2006(2)STR 161 (SC) to determine whether transaction involves transfer of right to use goods: – There must be goods available for delivery; – There must be a consensus ad idem as to the identity of the goods; – The transferee should have legal right to use the goods consequently all legal consequences of such

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

a transaction involves transfer of right to use goods. The CBEC also advised that the nature of each transaction has to be examined in totality keeping in view all the terms and conditions of an agreement relating to such transaction. 6.6) The take away from the combined reading of all the above reproduced legal provisions and the CBEC circular are that there cannot be one-size-fix-all method to determine whether a transaction is supply of tangible is deemed sale or service. On the other hand, each transaction having its own unique entities and conditions, will have to be critically examined and subject to various tests laid down by the Courts, in particular the tests laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in the landmark judgment of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited cited supra. This is precisely what we wish to proceed to do. 6.7) From a perusal of the various clauses of the agreements, the following conclusion emerge: i) There was a minimum hire charge that has to be paid by the hirer per

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

on of the agreement etc. v) It was also clarified that lessee shall run/operate the DG set for his exclusive use, therefore lessor hereby transfers the right to use the said DG set subject to fulfilment of all terms and conditions laid down in the lease agreement. vi) Total safety of machinery lay with lessee against any sabotage, misuse, damages, fire, accidents due to unauthorised operation/mishandling of the DG set by lessee personnel or outsider since DG set lies in the premises of the lessee. vii) In some agreements, it was laid down that DG technician shall be provided by the lessor to assist the lessee. 6.8) It then appears to reason that the transaction between the appellants and the hirers involves transfer of right to use goods and satisfy the tests laid by the Honble Apex Court in the BSNL judgment. DG sets are available for delivery. There is definitely a consensus between lessor and the lessee as to the identity of the goods. The hirers very much have legal right to use th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

40% – 60% etc. We find that these objections have been adequately countered by the appellants in the grounds of appeal clarifying that condition relates to the tolerance level of the equipments and deviation from it will result in break down of the equipment, accordingly, they prescribed a list of Dos and Donts by the manufacturer. Appellants have also clarified that DG technicians were provided by them in many cases as some of the hirers do not know how to technically operate the DG sets. We find merit in the counter argument of the appellants that DG technicians even if provided, the manner of operation of the DG set is only as per the instructions and requirements of the hirers and not on the directions of the appellants. In any case, no allegation has been put forth by the department that the number of hours of running the DG set and the manner of utilisation of such DG power generated, was decided only by the appellants and not by the hirers. Adjudicating authority has also pointe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ny shackles on the hirer for full enjoyment of the DG set hired by the hirers or for that matter, bring about less than complete transfer of possession and control. It is also noteworthy that the hirer pays hire charges and not service charges. We also find merit in the appellants contention that the deposit amount is also paid by the hirers, which is the practice only in cases of leasing contracts which are deemed sale transactions and not the cases where only service is provided or received. 6.11) We also find that the Advance Ruling Authority, Commercial Tax Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh in response to clarification sought by PMPL on whether the hiring of generators is covered by the clause levy of tax on transfer of right to use goods under APVAT or notvide an order dated 30-06-2006, had given the following ruling: V. The issue has been examined with reference to the provisions of the APVAT Act and Rules and HSN Codes notified by Government vide G.O.Ms.No: 398, Revenue (

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

generators. Hence it is evident that the owner (Lessor) is in the agreement to collect tax as applicable from the hirer. The ruling is that the transaction falls under the purview of sub-section (8) of Section 4 of APVAT Act. The consideration received for transfer of right to use goods is liable to tax at the rate specified to the goods in the schedules to the Act. It is also not the case of the department that the appellants are not discharging sales tax/VAT on the transactions. In fact the impugned order concedes that appellants have already paid VAT under APVAT Act on the entire hiring charges. Further, the adjudicating authority has refrained from imposing penalty under the Finance Act, 1994 on the grounds that appellants were paying VAT under the APVAT Act on the very same transaction. 6.12) Viewed in this light, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned transaction involving supply of DG sets on hire basis to various hirers is nothing but supply of tangible goods with

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SERVICES AN EDUCATION GUIDE, para 6.6. As already discussed, Honble Apex Court had laid down certain tests to determine whether the transaction involves transfer of right to use goods which aspect has already been analysed supra. These tests have already been applied by us in para 6.8 and we found that the transactions of appellant are very much in the nature of a transfer to the hirer of the right to use the goods with full possession and control, rendering the transaction as deemed sale with liability to discharge sales tax only. ii) In the case of G.S. Lamba & Sons vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2015(324) ELT 316 (A.P), the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which is the jurisdictional High Court for this Forum, the issue therein concern the liability of sales tax on the assessee who had provided Transit Mixers to the manufacturers of ready mix concrete, 24 hours and every day of the week as instructed by manufacturer while considering the issue, the Honble High Court held as fo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

it would be under the effective or general control over the goods; and (v) the approvals, concessions, licences and permits in relation to goods would also be available to the user of goods, even if such licences or permits are in the name of owner (transferor) of the goods, and (vi) during the period of contract exclusive right to use goods along with permits, licences etc., vests in the lessee. iii) The ratio laid down in the G.S. Lamba case has been followed by the Tribunal in the case of GIMMCO Ltd. vs. CCE&ST, Nagpur [2017(48)S.T.R 476 (Tri.-Mumbai), where, in a case involving dispute on liability to service tax on renting of earth moving equipments to various customers, the Tribunal inter-alia held as follows: 5.2) Revenue s contention is based on the clauses in the agreement relating to restrictions of use by the lessee, provision of skilled operator by the lessor and maintenance and repairs of the equipment by the lessor. Merely because restrictions are placed on the lessee

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ge to the equipment during the period of use. These responsibilities cast on the hirer clearly show that the right of possession and effective control of the equipment rest with the hirer; otherwise the hirer cannot be held responsible for misuse/abuse, safe custody/security, liability to settle disputes with third parties in relation to use etc. Further Cl. 4.3 of the agreement provides for charging of VAT at 12.5% on the monthly invoice value which shall be payable by the hirer. These terms and conditions stipulated in the agreement, lead to the conclusion that the transaction envisaged in the agreement is one of transfer of right to use which is a deemed sale under Section 2(24) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002. The Finance Ministers speech and the budget instructions issued by the C.B.E. & C. also clarify that if VAT is payable on the transaction, then service tax levy is not attracted. 6. In view of the foregoing, we are of the considered view that the assessees ac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

relates to demand prior to the period 16.05.2008 needs reconsideration. 8.3. Following the ratio laid down in the decision and judgements cited and discussed supra, we are of the considered opinion that the demand of service tax under Supply of Tangible Goods Service in the impugned orders cannot sustain and will have to be set aside which we hereby do. 9. The further two disputes relate to imposition of penalties in respect of non-inclusion of TDS amount in taxable value and wrong availment of cenvat credit on motor vehicles. We find that the appellants have been crying hoarse even at the stage of adjudication proceedings that these infractions have occurred only due to bonafide belief that TDS was not required to be added in assessable value and that credit availed on trucks and haulers, as opposed to motor vehicles, was in order. In any case, appellants have paid up the tax liabilities of ₹ 4,92,474/- and ₹ 2,71,106/- respectively with interest liabilities also thereto.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 9-7-2018 – Sl. No. Section/Sub-section/Clause Amendments as shown in Red and Strikethrough Rationale/Remarks CGST Act, 2017 Definitions 1. 2 (4) 2 (4) adjudicating authority means any authority, appointed or authorised to pass any order or decision under this Act, but does not include the Central Board of Excise Indirect Taxes and Customs, the Revisional Authority, the Authority for Advance Ruling, the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, the Appellate Authority, and the Appellate Tribunal and the Authority referred to in sub-section (2) of section 171; This is in pursuance of the change in name of the Central Board of Excise and Customs to the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs constituted under the Central Boards of Revenue Act, 1963 (54 of 1963). Further, the National AntiProfiteering Authority constituted by the Central Government under section 171 of the CGST Act is also required to be excluded from the definition of adjudicating

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the State s budget to meet the developmental needs of the region. It is being added now based on the request received from the State of Karnataka. 5. 2 (102) (102) services means anything other than goods, money and securities but includes activities relating to the use of money or its conversion by cash or by any other mode, from one form, currency or denomination, to another form, currency or denomination for which a separate consideration is charged; Explanation-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the expression services includes facilitating or arranging transactions in securities. Although securities has been excluded from the definition of goods and services in the CGST Act, facilitating or arranging transactions in securities is liable to GST. This has been clarified recently through a detailed FAQ on Banking and Insurance wherein it has been clarified that if some service charges or service fees or documentation fees or broking charges or such like fees or c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

supply of services as referred to in Schedule II. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),- (a) activities or transactions specified in Schedule III; or (b) such activities or transactions undertaken by the Central Government, a State Government or any local authority in which they are engaged as public authorities, as may be notified by the Government on the recommendations of the Council, shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services. (3) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (1), (1A) and (2), the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, specify, by notification, the transactions that are to be treated as- (a) a supply of goods and not as a supply of services; or (b) a supply of services and not as a supply of goods. Classification of certain specified activities or transactions (which qualify as a supply under the CGST Act) either as supply of goods or supply of services is supposed to be done in Schedule II. However, it

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

on-taxable territory to another place in the non-taxable territory without such goods entering into the taxable territory It is sought to exclude from the tax net such transactions which involve movement of goods, caused by a registered person, from one non-taxable territory to another non-taxable territory 9. Schedule III, new insertion 8 (a) Supply of warehoused goods to any person before clearance for home consumption. (b) Supply of goods by the consignee to any other person, by endorsement of documents of title to the goods, after the goods have been dispatched from the port of origin located outside India but before clearance for home consumption. Explanation.- For the purposes of this clause, the expression warehoused goods shall have the meaning as assigned to it in the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) It is sought to ensure that there is no double taxation of transactions where supply of goods occurs in the course of high sea sales and sale of warehoused goods, before clearance f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ds or services or both. 9 (4) The Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, specify a class of registered persons who shall, in respect of taxable goods or services or both received from an unregistered supplier, pay the tax on reverse charge basis as the recipient of such goods or services or both, and all the provisions of this Act shall apply to such recipient as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both Section 9 (4), which mandates that all registered persons shall pay the tax on reverse charge basis on purchases made from unregistered persons, is presently under suspension. This sub-section is being omitted for trade facilitation. Instead, it is proposed to take an enabling power for the Government to notify a class of registered persons who would be liable to pay tax on reverse charge basis in case of receipt of goods from an unregistered supplier Composition Scheme 11. 10 (1) & (2)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nt, not exceeding one hundred and fifty lakh crore rupees, as may be recommended by the Council. Provided further that a person who opts to pay tax under clause (a), clause (b) or clause (c) may supply services of value not exceeding ten percent of turnover in the preceding financial year in a State or Union territory or five lakh rupees, whichever is higher. (2) The registered person shall be eligible to opt under sub-section (1), if- (a) he is not engaged in the supply of services, other than supplies referred to in clause (b) of paragraph (6) of Schedule II save as provided in sub-section (1); (b) he is not engaged in making any supply of goods which are not leviable to tax under this Act; (c) he is not engaged in making any inter-State outward supplies of goods; (d) he is not engaged in making any supply of goods through an electronic commerce operator who is required to collect tax at source under section 52; and (e) he is not a manufacturer of such goods as may be notified by the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

le to opt for the scheme even if its percentage is very small as compared to the supplies of goods. With a view to enable these taxpayers to avail of the benefit of composition scheme, a new proviso is being added in order to allow them to be eligible for the scheme even if they supply services of value not exceeding 10% of the turnover in the preceding financial year in a State/Union territory or ₹ 5 lakhs, whichever is higher. This is a taxpayer-friendly measure and it is believed that small taxpayers would immensely benefit from this amendment. This is a consequential amendment, as a new proviso is being added to section 10 (1) which allows the registered person to opt for the scheme even if they supply services of value not exceeding 10% of the turnover in the preceding financial year in a State/Union territory or ₹ 5 lakhs, whichever is higher. Time and Value of Supply 12. 12 (2) 12 (2) The time of supply of goods shall be the earlier of the following dates, namely:- (

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Credit 14. 16 (2) (b) 16 (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, no registered person shall be entitled to the credit of any input tax in respect of any supply of goods or services or both to him unless,- (a) he is in possession of a tax invoice or debit note issued by a supplier registered under this Act, or such other tax paying documents as may be prescribed; (b) he has received the goods or services or both. Explanation.- For the purposes of this clause, it shall be deemed that the registered person has received the goods or, as the case may be, services,- (i) where the goods are delivered by the supplier to a recipient or any other person on the direction of such registered person, whether acting as an agent or otherwise, before or during movement of goods, either by way of transfer of documents of title to goods or otherwise; (ii) where the services are provided by the supplier to any person on the direction of and on account of such registered person; One of the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

der section 39: Provided that : Provided further that where a recipient fails to pay to the supplier of goods or services or both, other than the supplies on which tax is payable on reverse charge basis, the amount towards the value of supply along with tax payable thereon within a period of one hundred and eighty days from the date of issue of invoice by the supplier, an amount equal to the input tax credit availed by the recipient shall be added to his output tax liability, along with interest thereon, in such manner as may be prescribed: It is proposed to remove the liability to pay interest in case where the recipient has been made liable to pay an amount equal to the ITC availed in case he fails to pay to the supplier of goods or services or both the amount towards the value of supply along with tax payable thereon within a period of 180 days from the date of issue of invoice by the supplier. Since upon payment of the due amount to the supplier, the recipient shall be eligible to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

g anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 16 and sub-section (1) of section 18, input tax credit shall not be available in respect of the following, namely:- (a) motor vehicles for transportation of persons having approved seating capacity of not more than thirteen persons (including the driver), vessels and aircraft and other conveyances except when they are used- (i) for making the following taxable supplies, namely:- (A) further supply of such vehicles or ; vessels or aircraft conveyances; or (B) transportation of passengers; or (C) imparting training on driving, flying, navigating such vehicles, vessels or aircraft or conveyances; (ii) for transportation of goods; and (iii) for transportation of money for or by a banking company or a financial institution. (aa) services of general insurance, servicing, repair and maintenance in so far as they relate to motor vehicles, vessels and aircraft for which the credit is not available in accordance with the provisions of clause (a)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ices or both or as part of a taxable composite or mixed supply; and (iii) travel benefits extended to employees on vacation such as leave or home travel concession: Provided that the input tax credit in respect of such goods or services or both shall be available, where the provision of such goods or services or both is obligatory for an employer to provide to its employees under any law for the time being in force. It is proposed to expand the scope of ITC availability in case of motor vehicles having approved capacity of not more than 13 persons (including the driver) in case it is used for specified purposes. The amendment is sought to make it clear that input tax credit would now be available in respect of dumpers, work-trucks, fork-lift trucks and other special purpose motor vehicles. After the amendment is carried out, input tax credit would be denied only in respect of motor vehicles for transport of persons having approved seating capacity of not more than 13 persons (including

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rovide to its employees under any law for the time being in force. This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment. 18. 20, Explanation (c) Clause (c) of Explanation to section 20: (c) the term turnover , in relation to any registered person engaged in the supply of taxable goods as well as goods not taxable under this Act, means the value of turnover, reduced by the amount of any duty or tax levied under entry entries 84 and 92A of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and entries 51 and 54 of List II of the said Schedule. It is proposed to exclude the amount of tax levied under entry 92A of List I from the value of turnover for the purposes of distribution of credit. The same was inadvertently left out from clause (c) of Explanation to section 20. Section 20 deals with the manner of distribution of credit by the Input Service Distributor. Section 20 (2) (d) provides that where the credit is attributable to more than one recipient, such credit shall be distributed amongst the recip

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ption for registration in their State should be raised from ₹ 10 lakhs to ₹ 20 lakhs 20. 24 (x) 24 (x) every electronic commerce operator who is required to collect tax at source under section 52; An e-commerce operator is presently required to take compulsory registration in terms of section 24(x) even if his aggregate turnover in a financial year does not exceed ₹ 20 lakhs. Clause (x) of section 24 is being amended to provide that only those e-commerce operators who are required to collect tax at source under section 52 would be required to take compulsory registration. Other e-commerce operators who are not required to collect tax at source under section 52 would henceforth not be required to take registration if their aggregate turnover in a financial year did not exceed ₹ 20 lakhs. This is a taxpayer-friendly measure. Small e-commerce operators who are not required to collect tax at source under section 52 would now be eligible for availing the threshold ex

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

g more than one unit, as defined in the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 (28 of 2005), in a Special Economic Zone shall be granted a separate registration for each such unit, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed. It is proposed to allow persons having multiple places of business in a State or Union territory to obtain separate registrations for each such place of business. As per the extant provisions, a person seeking registration under the Act shall be granted a single registration in a State or Union territory. However, if he has multiple business verticals in a State or Union territory, he may obtain separate registration for each business vertical. Certain PSUs have requested for separate registration for their individual units in a State, a facility which was available prior to 1st July 2017. This amendment is a taxpayerfriendly measure. It is proposed to insert the provisions of separate registration for a person having a unit(s) in a Special Economic Zone or being a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ation of registration, the proper officer may suspend the registration of the person subject to such conditions and limitations as may be prescribed. It is proposed to provide that once a registered person has applied for cancellation of registration, the proper officer may temporarily suspend its registration till the procedural formalities for cancellation are completed. This measure would relieve the taxpayer of continued compliance burden under the law till such time as the process of allowing cancellation of registration is completed. 23. 29 (2), new proviso Provided that the proper officer shall not cancel the registration without giving the person an opportunity of being heard.: Provided further that pending cancellation of registration, the proper officer may suspend the registration of the person subject to such conditions and limitations as may be prescribed. The insertion of this proviso seeks to ensure that once it is sought to cancel the registration of a registered person

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ices is found to be less than the taxable value or tax payable in respect of such supply, the registered person, who has supplied such goods or services or both, shall issue to the recipient a one or more debit notes for supplies made in a financial year containing such particulars as may be prescribed. At present, a credit/debit note which is issued by the registered person is required to be issued invoice-wise. This causes avoidable compliance burden for tax payers. Thus, it is proposed to allow issuance of consolidated credit/debit which is in line with the best international practices. The amendment seeks to permit a registered person to issue consolidated credit / debit notes in respect of multiple invoices issued in a Financial Year without linking the same to individual invoices. 25. 35 (5), new proviso Every registered person whose turnover during a financial year exceeds the prescribed limit shall get his accounts audited by a chartered accountant or a cost accountant and shal

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

annual accounts of Canteen Stores Department (CSD) are internally audited by the Controller of Defence Accounts (CDA) and therefore, should not be subject to audit by a Chartered Accountant or a Cost Accountant. Thus, it is proposed to provide that any department of the Central or State Government / local authority which is subject to audit by CAG need not get their books of account audited by any Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant. Returns 26. 39(9) Subject to the provisions of sections 37 and 38, if any registered person after furnishing a return under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) discovers any omission or incorrect particulars therein, other than as a result of scrutiny, audit, inspection or enforcement activity by the tax authorities, he shall rectify such omission or incorrect particulars in the return to be furnished for the month or quarter during which such omission or incorrect particulars are noticed, or in t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

der the provisions of section 10 or section 51 or section 52 (hereafter in this section referred to as the supplier ), and for verifying, validating, modifying or deleting such supplies by the corresponding registered person (hereafter in this section referred to as the recipient ) in connection with the furnishing of return under section 39 shall be such as may be prescribed.. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 41, section 42 orsection 43, the procedure for availing of input tax credit by the recipient andverification thereof shall be such as may be prescribed. (3) The procedure specified under sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) may include the following:- (i) the procedure for furnishing the details of a tax invoice by the supplier on the common portal for the purposes of availing input tax credit by the recipient in terms of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 16; (ii) the amount of tax specified in an invoice for which the details have been furnished by the sup

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

overy thereof; and (vii) the procedure, safeguards and threshold of tax amounts in the invoices, the details of which can be furnished under clause (i) by a newly registered person or by a registered person who has defaulted in payment of tax liability, exceeding the amount of tax or the period of time specified in the rules. A new section is being introduced in order to enable the new return filing procedure as proposed by the Returns Committee and approved by GST Council. GST Practitioner 28. 48 48 (2) A registered person may authorise an approved goods and services tax practitioner to furnish the details of outward supplies under section 37, the details of inward supplies under section 38 and the return under section 39 or section 44 or section 45, and to perform such other functions and in such manner as may be prescribed. Presently, they are authorised to furnish the details of outward and inward supplies and various returns under sections 39, 44 or 45 on behalf of a registered pe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ax; (d) the Union territory tax shall first be utilized towards payment of Union territory tax and the amount remaining, if any, may be utilized towards payment of integrated tax only when the balance of the input tax credit on account of central tax is not available for payment of integrated tax; (e) the central tax shall not be utilised towards payment of State tax or Union territory tax; (f) the State tax or Union territory tax shall not be utilized towards payment of central tax: Provided that input tax credit on account of central tax, State tax or Union territory tax shall be utilised towards payment of integrated tax under clause (b), clause (c) or clause (d) only after the input tax credit available on account of integrated tax has been first utilised fully towards such payment. This sub-section deals with the order of utilization of input tax credit. Section 49(5)(c) provides that the amount of ITC available in the electronic credit ledger of the registered person on account o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, prescribe the order of utilization of input tax credit of integrated tax, central tax, State tax or Union territory tax, as the case may be, towards payment of any such tax. It is proposed to take an enabling power for the Government to prescribe any specific order of utilization of input tax credit of any of the taxes viz., integrated tax, central tax, State tax or Union territory tax for the payment of the said taxes. Refunds 31. 54, Explanation (2) (e) Explanation.-For the purposes of this section,- (2) relevant date means- (e) in the case of refund of unutilised input tax credit under clause (ii) of sub-section (3), the end of the financial year due date for furnishing of return under section 39 for the period in which such claim for refund arises; It is proposed to correct an inherent contradiction of the relevant date in case of refund of unutilized ITC under section 54(3) since as per Explanation (2)(e) to section 54, t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

unit/SEZ developer and the principle of unjust enrichment does not apply in such cases. Presently, under section 16 (3) of the IGST Act, only the supplier making supplies of goods or services to an SEZ unit/SEZ developer can claim refund. It is proposed to allow ITC to the SEZ developer or SEZ unit and the supplier in DTA may recover the tax amount from such SEZ unit, etc. Thus, it is proposed to amend section 54(8)(a) in order to provide that the principle of unjust enrichment will apply in case of refund claim arising out of supplies of goods or services made to SEZ developer/unit. 33. 54, Explanation (2)(c)(i) Explanation.-For the purposes of this section,- (2) relevant date means- (c) in the case of services exported out of India where a refund of tax paid is available in respect of services themselves or, as the case may be, the inputs or input services used in such services, the date of- (i) receipt of payment in convertible foreign exchange , or in Indian Rupees where permitted

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y be, sub-section (5) of section 25. (2) For the purposes of this clause, the term Collector means the Collector of a revenue district and includes a Deputy Commissioner or a district magistrate or head of the revenue administration in a revenue district. It is proposed to provide that recovery may be made from distinct persons present in different States / UTs in order to ensure speedy recovery from other establishments of the registered person. It is proposed to clarify the definition of the term Collector since the same varies across different States. Appeals to Appellate Authority and Appellate Tribunal 35. 107 (6) No appeal shall be filed under sub-section (1), unless the appellant has paid- (a) in full, such part of the amount of tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty arising from the impugned order, as is admitted by him; and (b) a sum equal to ten per cent. of the remaining amount of tax in dispute arising from the said order, subject to a maximum of twenty-five crore rupees, in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2 (8), the appellant is required to pay a sum equal to 20% of the tax in dispute, in addition to the amount paid under section 107 (6), arising from the order of the Appellate Authority for filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. This section is being amended to provide a ceiling of ₹ 50 crores for filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment especially in cases where the tax demand is of hundreds of crores of rupees. Transitional Provisions 37. 140 (1) (1) A registered person, other than a person opting to pay tax under section 10, shall be entitled to take, in his electronic credit ledger, the amount of CENVAT credit of [eligible duties] carried forward in the return relating to the period ending with the day immediately preceding the appointed day, furnished by him under the existing law in such manner as may be prescribed…… ….Explanation 1.-For the purposes of sub-sections [(1)], (3), (4) and (6), the expre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

contained in rule 117(1) of the CGST Rules. The eligible duties do not include the additional duty of excise leviable under section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Textile and Textile Articles) Act, 1978. For removal of doubts, it is proposed to clarify that the expression eligible duties and taxes excludes any cess which has not been specified in Explanation 1 or Explanation 2 above and any cess which is collected as additional duty of customs under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 38. 143 (1), new proviso (1) A registered person (hereafter in this section referred to as the principal ) may under intimation and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, send any inputs or capital goods, without payment of tax, to a job worker for job work and from there subsequently send to another job worker and likewise, and shall,- (a) bring back inputs, after completion of job work or otherwise, or capital goods, other than moulds and dies, jigs and fixtur

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

three years respectively. It is proposed to insert a proviso in section 143 to provide that the period of one year or three years may, on sufficient cause being shown, be extended by the Commissioner for a further period not exceeding one year and two years respectively. This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment to cover situations where the period of one year specified is not adequate in respect of job works such as hull construction/fabrication of vessels (for defence purposes), since these processes complete in a period of around 14 to 16 months. IGST Act, 2017 39. 2 (6) (iv) (6) export of services means the supply of any service when, – (i) the supplier of service is located in India; (ii) the recipient of service is located outside India; (iii) the place of supply of service is outside India; (iv) the payment for such service has been received by the supplier of service in convertible foreign exchange or in Indian Rupees where permitted by the Reserve Bank of India; and (v) the suppl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

) 12 (8) The place of supply of services by way of transportation of goods, including by mail or courier to,- (a) a registered person, shall be the location of such person; (b) a person other than a registered person, shall be the location at which such goods are handed over for their transportation. Provided that if the transportation of goods is to a place outside India, the place of supply shall be the place of destination of such goods. In order to provide a level playing field to the domestic transportation companies and promote export of goods, it is proposed that the transportation of goods from a place in India to a place outside India by a transporter located in India would not be chargeable to GST, as place of supply will be outside India. This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment. 42. Proviso to 13 (3) (a) (3) The place of supply of the following services shall be the location where the services are actually performed, namely:- (a) services supplied in respect of goods which are

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e skill development in our country. 43. 17 (1), new proviso 17 (1): Provided that fifty per cent. of such amount as may be decided on the recommendation of the Council, which does not get apportioned under clauses (a) to (f) for the time being, shall be apportioned to the Central Government on ad hoc basis and shall be adjusted against amounts apportioned under clauses (a) to (f). The proposed amendment provides that fifty percent of the amount of IGST which does not get apportioned under clauses (a) to (f) for the time being shall be apportioned to the Central Government on the recommendations of the Council and shall be adjusted against the amounts apportioned under clauses (a) to (f). 44. 17 (2), new proviso 17 (2): Provided also that fifty per cent. of the amount referred to in the first proviso to sub-section (1) shall be apportioned to the State Government on ad hoc basis and shall be adjusted against amounts apportioned under clauses (a) to (f). Similar provision is made for adh

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Levy of GST – job-work – Whether the processing of goods belonging to another person qualifies as job work even if it amounts to manufacture? – Held Yes – TMI Updates – Highlights

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – CAPurnima Bothra – Dated:- 9-7-2018 Last Replied Date:- 10-7-2018 – Case Study:Lessor has raised demand note asking lease rental for the whole year.However lessee has moved to court and is not ready to pay any dues.Now in this scenario Lessor is paying GST out of his pocket as no amount is recoverable from the lessee which leading to huge cash blockage at this moment.Can GST amount be escaped/defered on uncertain revenue and be paid once the revenue becomes certain. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = You can decide according to the definition of 'Time of supply' as per details given below:-13. Time of supply of services. – (1) The liability to pay tax on services shall arise at t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

vided that where the supplier of taxable service receives an amount up to one thousand rupees in excess of the amount indicated in the tax invoice, the time of supply to the extent of such excess amount shall, at the option of the said supplier, be the date of issue of invoice relating to such excess amount. If you have issued invoice, liability arises in the following month. If no invoice is issued, then the time of supply is the date of receipt of payment. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir/Madam,Please consult your Advocate seeking the interim order from the court to get gst amount from the party, till the final order. Also check Section 92 is applicable or not.Our experts may correct me if mistakenThanks – Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GO

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Zaid Ansari – Dated:- 9-7-2018 Last Replied Date:- 10-7-2018 – Hello Sir, I want to ask that how can i change invoice number after submitting GSTR-1.I have entered wrong invoice number in my previous month return now how can i amend it.Please Reply. – Reply By YAGAY and SUN – The Reply = you may make necessary changes in next month's return in statement 2A. – Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN – The Reply = I endorse the views of Yagay & Sun. – Rep

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =