Goods and Services Tax – Levy of GST – procurement of services or material from Govt./Govt. Authority – The applicant is covered under local authority – exempted from GST – TMI Updates – Highlights
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (6) TMI 1265 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 23 (Ker.) , [2018] 2 GSTL 124 (Ker) – Detention of goods – E-way bill not produced – Evasion of duty or not – Held that:- The goods were transported on payment of tax; but, however, the dealer intends to re-sell the goods from his dealership. In such circumstances, suspicion of evasion cannot be brushed aside at this stage.
–
The interim order set aside and goods released on execution of a simple bond for the value of goods in the prescribed form and furnishing of security in the form of Bank Guarantee equivalent to the amount of applicable tax and penalty payable as has been demanded in Exhibits P17 and P18 orders.
–
Appeal disposed off. – W.A. No. 1038 of 2018 Dated:-
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ules. Only on uploading of E-way bill, would the Department be notified of purchase and movement, is the contention. Without that, there could be an evasion suspected. The learned Single Judge found that the case of the writ petitioners is covered by the decision in W.P.(C) No.196 of 2018. 3. We had partly heard the appeal from the aforesaid writ petition today. We notice that there is clear distinction on facts insofar as, therein the transaction was alleged to be not taxable for reason of the transport being made to the work site of one of the applicants and the other after job works, to the business premises of the dealer. Therein, there was a delivery challan under Rule 55 of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules. The learned Single J
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
GST – States – 14/2018-State Tax – Dated:- 22-6-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI FINANCE (REVENUE-I) DEPARTMENT DELHI SACHIVALAYA, I.P. ESTATE: NEW DELHI-110002 Notification No. 14/2018-State Tax No. F3(1)/Fin (Rev-I)/2018-19/DS-VI/279 Dated: 22-06-2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Delhi Act 03 of 2017), the Lt. Governor of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- 1. (1) These rules may be called the Delhi Goods and Services Tax (Third Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) Save as otherwise provided in these rules, they shall come into force from 23rd Mar
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
other job worker, indicating therein the quantity and description of goods where the goods are sent by one job worker to another or are returned to the principal."; (ii) in rule 127, in clause (iv), after the words ''to furnish a performance report to the Council by the tenth", the word "day" shall be inserted; (iii) in rule 129, in sub-rule (6), for the words "as allowed by the Standing Committee", the words "as may be allowed by the Authority" shall be substituted; (iv) in rule 133, after sub-rule (3), the following sub-rule may be inserted, namely:- "(4) If the report of the Director General of Safeguards referred to in sub-rule (6) of rule 129 recommends that there is contravention or
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (7) TMI 984 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – duty paying documents – credit availed on the basis of photo copy of the bills of entries accompanied by the invoice – Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 – units dispatched from port itself – Held that:- In this case, just to save the additional expenditure incurred the appellant has despatched the consignment to their various units from the port itself – As long as the input is received in the factory of the production and used for the manufacture of excisable goods, there should not be any bar in taking Cenvat credit under Rule 9 thereof which is substantial benefit and not to be denied on account and procedural ground.
–
CENVAT Credit allowed – appeal allowed – decided in
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
efore, the credit has been taken in incorrect manner contrary to the Cenvat Credit Rules. 3. The ld. Advocate states that the similar issue has been decided in case of their own unit at Gurgaon which is also one of the unit who has availed credit at the strength of such invoice and copy of Bill of Entry. 4. The fact about the application of the findings of Commissioner, Central Excise, Gurgaon and subsequent acceptance thereof, by the Committee of Chief Commissioner was brought to the notice of ld. Adjudicating Authority in case of impugned order. However, he has not accepted the same relying on the judgment of Union of India Vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. – 1991 (55) ELT 433(SC), wherein he has not bound by the order of the other C
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e appeal. The issue lies in a narrow compass and the availability of the Cenvat credit at the strength of photo copy of the bills of entries accompanied by the invoice thereof. In this case, just to save the additional expenditure incurred the appellant has despatched the consignment to their various units from the port itself. As long as the input is received in the factory of the production and used for the manufacture of excisable goods, there should not be any bar in taking Cenvat credit under Rule 9 thereof which is substantial benefit and not to be denied on account and procedural ground. In this case, Revenue has not brought before us there is any loss caused by the appellant to the Revenue but for the procedural aspect of taking cre
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (8) TMI 282 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, MADHYA PRADESH – TMI – Works contract – Composite supply – natural bundling of supply of goods and services – What is HSN in which the service of construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling i Substation at Badwar, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis against Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (Lot-I) under World Bank Financing shall fall? – What is HSN in which the service of construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Substation at Barsita Desh, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis against Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (Lot – II) under World Bank Financing shall fall? – What is HSN in which the service of construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Substation at Ramnagar Pahad, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey bas
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
pply of service.
–
Ruling:- The HSN Code for the supply of composite service in the nature of Works Contract under the all the three agreements entered into with RUMS, shall be 9954/995423 – The rate of CGST on the supply being made under the contract shall be according to Notification No. 11/2017 – Central Tax (Rates) – The rate of MPGST on the supply being made under the contract shall be also 9 percent as per the corresponding Notification to the Notification No. 11/2017- Central Tax (Rates), issued under MPGST Act,2017. – Case Number 02 OF 2018 And Order No. 03 of 2018 Dated:- 22-6-2018 – Shri Rajeev Agrawal, Joint Commissioner, And Commissioner CGST And Central Excies And Shri Manoj Kumar Choubey, Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Commircial Tax Division For The Applicant : Sandeep Mukherjee, CA RULING 1. The present application has been filed u/s 97 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, y 2017 and MP Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter also referred to CGST
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
cuation infrastructure. 3.3 At present the applicant has entered into a contract with RUMS for: * construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Substation at Badwar, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis against Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (LoM) under World Bank Financing; * construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Substation at Barsita Desh, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis against Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (Lot – II) under World Bank Financing; and * construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Substation at Ramnagar Pahad, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis against Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (Lot – III) under World Bank Financing. 3.4 Under the agreements with the RUMS, the scope of work involves supply of all Transmission Line
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
is as follows :- (i) What is HSN in which the service of construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling i Substation at Badwar, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis against Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (Lot-I) under World Bank Financing shall fall? (ii) What is HSN in which the service of construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Substation at Barsita Desh, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis against Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (Lot – II) under World Bank Financing shall fall? (iii) What is HSN in which the service of construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Substation at Ramnagar Pahad, REWA along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis against Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (Lot – III) under World Bank Financing shall fall? (iv) What shall be the app
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
t regarding classification of the work is that the work being done by the applicant under contract with RUMS is construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Substation along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work, is in the nature of a Composite Supply, since it involves supply of goods as well as services. Also, as per the provisions of the CGST Act, this work is in the nature of a Works Contract and is classifiable as supply of service. In support of this contention, the applicant refers to SI.No. 6 of Schedule II to the CGST Act, 2017. 6.3 Regarding the applicable rate of GST, the applicant submits that the rate of GST on Works Contract on the nature of work being done for RUMS shall be taken from Notification for Services, i.e. Notification No. 11/2017 – Central Tax (Rates), para 3, clause (ii) for CGST and that the rate of GST comes to 18%. 6.4 We have perused the contents of the agreement between the applicant and RUMS, more specifically the scope o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
he scope of work in all the three agreements are identical, accordingly, all the three agreements shall have the same classification for the purpose of taxation under the GST Laws. Further, we concur with the submission of the applicant regarding applicability of SI.No. 6 of Schedule II of the CGST Act, 2017 and MPGST Act, 2017, to the work being done by the applicant. The work being done by the applicant being a Composite Supply and Works Contract u/s 2 is clearly a supply of service. 6.7 Regarding the averment of RUMS that since the work is part of evacuation infrastructure being exclusively for Solar Power, for a Solar Park and is being developed by Solar Project Park Developer, it is observed that the rate of 5% on activity relating to Solar Power is the rate of GST for supply of Goods. The GST rate of 5% advalorem under Chapter Heading 84 and 85, as given in SI.No. 234 of Schedule I of Notification No. 1/2017 – Central Tax (Rates) is for supply of goods. The relevant para of the N
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
n the corresponding entry in column (2) of the said Schedules ……………… The entry at SI. No. 234 is as under: S. No. Chapter/ Heading/ Sub-heading/ Tariff item Description of Goods 234. 84 or 85 Following renewable energy devices Et parts for their manufacture (a) Bio-gas plant (b) Solar power based devices (c) Solar power generating system (d) Wind mills, Wind Operated Electricity Generator (WOEG) (e) Waste to energy plants/devices (f) Solar lantern/solar lamp (g) Ocean waves/tidal waves energy devices/plants 6.8 It is seen that Notification No. 11/2017 – Central Tax (Rates) and corresponding notification under MPGST has prescribed 2.5% as CGST, meaning 5% GST on the following works – a. Under para3, clause (vii) for Composite supply of works contract as defined in clause of section 2 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, involving predominantly earth work (that is, constituting more than 75% of the value of the works contract) provided to the CG,SG,UT, local aut
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Works Contract for creating infrastructure which is to be exclusively used for Solar Power or in a Solar Park for or by a Solar Project Park Developer. 7. Order u/s 98 of the CGST Act, 2017 and MPGST Act, 2017: In view of deliberations above, we pass the Advance Ruling: 7.1 The HSN Code for the supply of composite service in the nature of Works Contract under the all the three agreements entered into with RUMS, referred to in para 3.3 supra shall be 9954/995423, as detailed hereunder: Annexure : Scheme of Classification of Services S. No. Section, Chapter, Heading or Group Service Code (Tariff) Service Description ……………… 15. Group 99542 995423 General construction services of long-distance underground/overland/submarine pipelines, communication and electric power lines (cables); pumping stations and related works; transformer stations and related works 7.2. The rate of CGST on the supply being made under the contract referred to in para 3.3 supra shall be according to Noti
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (8) TMI 283 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, MADHYA PRADESH – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 171 (A. A. R. – GST) – Whether the Project Development and Management Consultancy services (PDMC) provided by Applicant to recipient under the Contract for AMRUT; and the Project Management Consultancy services (PMC) under the Contract for PMAY would qualify as an activity in relation to function entrusted to Panchayat or Municipality under Article 243G or Article 243W respectively, of the Constitution of India? – Held that:- Similarly, as per website of Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana-Housing for All (Urban), Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, the PMAY is a Scheme to provide central assistance to Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and other implementing agencies through States/UTs for Rehabilitation of existing slum dwellers using their land as a resource through private participation, and Affordable Housing in Partnership – the various objectives of both the above Schemes are covered in more than one clau
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
cost includes the cost of service rendered along with reimbursement of cost of procurement of goods for rendering such service, and, thus, be eligible for exemption from levy of CGST and MPGST, respectively – Held that:- These items are not naturally bundled into the service being provided by the applicant Further, as per the contracts, such items have to be disposed off by the applicant after completion of contract as directed by the principal, and the cost of such items would be over and above the contract price. Therefore, such purchases of equipments, furnitures, etc. would neither make the said contract of consultancy as a works contract, nor a composite contract, and therefore, due to purchase of Equipments, Furnitures, etc. by the applicant, and getting reimbursement of their costs from the employer will not affect eligibility of the applicant for NIL rate of tax in Sr. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28th June, 2017 and corresponding notification is
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
from levy of CGST and MPGST, respectively. – Case No. 8/2018 Dated:- 22-6-2018 – Shri Rajeev Agrawal, Joint Commissioner, And Commissioner CGST And Central Excies And Shri Manoj Kumar Choubey, Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Commircial Tax Division For The Applicant : Ravindra Singh Jadon RULING 1. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE: 1.1 M/s. Egis India Consulting Engineers P. Ltd., Shajapur (hereinafter referred to as the Applicants) have been engaged in providing Consulting services to their clients and they have been registered with GSTN under GSTIN 23AACCB6390F1ZW. 1.2 The Applicant is engaged in providing engineering, project structuring and operations services in various sectors like transport, urban development, building, industry, water, environment and energy. The Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India has rolled out the Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation ( AMRUT) for transforming urban India. 1.3 The Applicant has been appointed as Project Development
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s of AMRUT as well as PMAY, the following understanding appears, as contended by the applicants: (i) For the purpose of executing the Contracts, the Applicant would provide consulting services to the Recipient in respect of survey and investigations, feasibility study, bid process management, contract management and supervision etc., by deploying its personnel conforming to the requirement of the RFP documents for both Schemes. Such personnel would be required to travel and visit the Project site. (ii) Further, the Applicant procures certain goods which are required for rendering the above services of survey, investigation etc. Such goods include laptop, desktop etc., which are procured by Applicant on behalf of Recipient, which are later on reimbursed on actual cost basis. Such expenses are charged over and above the consideration for remuneration and reimbursable expenses of travel, office accommodation, per diem allowance etc. These assets are later on transferred to the Recipient b
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
rmed in relation to the services being provided by applicant to the recipient (State/ULBs) vide reference to the contracts: 2.1 Whether the Project Development and Management Consultancy services ( PDMC ) provided by Applicant to recipient under the Contract for AMRUT; and the Project Management Consultancy services ( PMC ) under the Contract for PMAY would qualify as an activity in relation to function entrusted to Panchayat or Municipality under Article 243G or Article 243W respectively, of the Constitution of India? 2.2 If answer to question 2.1 is in affirmative, would such services provided by the Applicant qualify as Pure services (excluding works contract service or other composite supplies involving supply of any goods) as provided in serial number 3of Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June, 2017[Notification No. FA -3-42/201711/v (53) dated 30 June 2017, as amended by Notification No. 2/2018- Central Tax (Rate) dated 25 January, 2018 issued under Central Go
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
of personal hearing. In view of above deliberations and on considering the various clauses of agreement between Directorate, Urban Administration & Development, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, and the applicant M/s. Egis India Consulting Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Shajapur, Madhya Pradesh ^\ for Project Development and Management Consultant (PDMC) for Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT) including Project Management of other Notified Schemes in Project Area and the Project Management Consultancy Services (PMC) under the Contract for PMAY , we proceed to examine the questions applied for by the applicant. 5.2 Coming to the first question; Whether the Project Development and Management Consultancy services (PDMC) provided by Applicant to recipient under the Contract for AMRUT, and the Project Management Consultancy Services (PMC) under the Contract for PMAY would qualify as an activity in relation to function entrusted to Panchayat or Municipality under Art
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Urban Transport, Green Space and Parks, Reforms management and support, Capacity building, etc. 5.4 Similarly, as per website of Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana-Housing for All (Urban), Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, the PMAY is a Scheme to provide central assistance to Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and other implementing agencies through States/UTs for Rehabilitation of existing slum dwellers using their land as a resource through private participation, and Affordable Housing in Partnership. 5.5 Thus, the various objectives of both the above Schemes are covered in more than one clauses of the Eleventh and Twelfth Schedule referred in Article 243G and 243W of the Constitution, including Housing, drinking water, sanitation, Park, etc. 5.6 Accordingly, we hold that the Consultancy services rendered by the applicant under the Agreement with Urban Administration & Development, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal for implementation of AMRUT and PMAY are in relation to functions entrust
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the cost of service rendered along with reimbursement of cost of procurement of goods for rendering such services, and, this, be eligible for exemption from levy of CGST and MPGST, respectively ? 5.8 The Contract awarded to the applicant by Urban Administration & Development, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, for Project Development and Management Consultant (PDMC) for Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT) including Project Management of other Notified Schemes in Project Area is a Pure Service Contract. It is not covered in exclusion clause pertaining to works contract service or composite supplies involving supply of any goods . It is evidently in relation to the functions entrusted to Municipalities under Article 243W and to Panchayats under Article 243G of the Constitution, and therefore, it is exempt from tax being covered in Sr. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28th June, 2017 (as amended from time to time) issued under C
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
of equipments, furnitures etc., which the applicant is required to purchase, of the like of Lap-tops, computers, refrigerators, furnitures etc., we find that these items are not naturally bundled into the service being provided by the applicant Further, we also find that as per the contracts, such items have to be disposed off by the applicant after completion of contract as directed by the principal, and the cost of such items would be over and above the contract price. Therefore, we hold that such purchases of equipments, furnitures, etc. would neither make the said contract of consultancy as a works contract, nor a composite contract, and therefore, due to purchase of Equipments, Furnitures, etc. by the applicant, and getting reimbursement of their costs from the employer will not affect eligibility of the applicant for NIL rate of tax in Sr. No. 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28th June, 2017 and corresponding notification issued under Madhya Pradesh Goods a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ayat or Municipality under Article 243G or Article 243W respectively, of the Constitution of India. 6.2 In respect of Question No.2, we hold that such services provided by the Applicant would qualify as Pure services (excluding works contract service or other composite supplies involving supply of any goods) as provided in serial number 3of Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June, 2017 as amended by Notification No. 2/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25 January, 2018 issued under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ( CGST ) and corresponding notifications issued under Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (MPGST Act) in respect of the cost of service rendered along with reimbursement of cost of procurement of goods for rendering such service, and, thus, be eligible for exemption from levy of CGST and MPGST, respectively. However, the disposal of tangible goods at the end of contract shall be subject to GST depending upon the circumstances and manner of di
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
GST – States – F.17(131)ACCT/GST/2017/3640 – Dated:- 22-6-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT ORDER Jaipur, Dated June, 22 2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No. 9 of 2017), hereinafter referred as the said Act, read with rule 109A of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 and notification no. F.12(30)FD/Tax/2018-19 dated 14th May, 2018 issued by the State Government, I,
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
GST – States – F.1(PS-ACCT-HQ)ESTT/CCT/18/818 – Dated:- 22-6-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT No. F.1(PS-ACCT-HQ)ESTT/CCT/18/818 Dated: 22-06-2018 ORDER In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No. 9 of 2017), hereinafter referred as the said Act, read with rule 109A of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, the officers specified in column (3) of the table below are authorised to Act as Appellate Authorities" as mentioned against them in column no. 2 as referred to in Section 107 of the said Act, in respect of orders or decisions passed under the said Act by the Adjudicating Authorities for persons falling under terri
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
REGARDING CLARIFICATION OF CERTAIN ISSUES UNDER GST – GST – States – Circular No. 1819017/331 – Dated:- 22-6-2018 Circular – Trade Notice – Public Notice – Instructions – Office orders
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
GST – States – G.O.Ms.No. 226 – Dated:- 22-6-2018 – REVENUE DEPARTMENT (COMMERCIAL TAXES – II) THE ANDHRA PRADESH GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 (ACT NO. 16 OF 2017)-SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 23 OF THE ACT-SPECIFYING THE CATEGORY OF PERSONS EXEMPT FROM OBTAINING REGISTRATION UNDER THE ACT. [G.O.Ms.No.226, Revenue (Commercial Taxes-II), 22nd June, 2017.] NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 23 of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Ac
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
G AND C INFRA INNOVATIONS Versus UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE) , NEW DELHI, THE COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPT., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE GST COUNCIL, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, NEW DELHI, THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, KOCHI, THE NODAL OFFICER, GOODS AND SERVICES TAX NETWORK, NEW DELHI AND THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOCHI – 2018 (8) TMI 973 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2018 (18) G. S. T. L. 28 (Ker.) – Input tax credit – migration to GST Regime – unable to generate FORM GST TRAN-2 – Held that:- It is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to prefer a representation pointing out the grievance before the additional eighth respondent, the Nodal Officer
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ns, the petitioner was required to upload FORM GST TRAN-1 for the said purpose. The case of the petitioner is that there occurred a mistake while uploading FORM GST TRAN-1 and as such, they are unable to generate FORM GST TRAN-2. It is stated by the petitioner that there is no provision to revise FORM GST TRAN-1 uploaded by the petitioner and as such, they are unable to take credit of the input tax available to them. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard in the writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as also the learned Central Government Counsel. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as also the orders passed in similar writ petitions
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (9) TMI 546 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING MADHYA PRADESH – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 163 (A. A. R. – GST) – Classification of Services – Construction, Erection, Commissioning and Installation of projects – Electrical Transmission Lines, Sub-Stations and Line Shifting – service of construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling Sub-station along with associated 220 kV DCDS Transmission Line and associated feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis under World Bank Financing – rate of CGST and SGST on the supply being made under the contract.
–
Held that:- On a reading of the scope of work, it is clear that the work involves both supply of goods and supply of services, which are naturally bundled. Accordingly, under this agreement, the applicant is providing a composite supply within the meaning of Section 2 of the CGST Act, 2017 – The HSN Code for the supply of composite service in the nature of Work Contract under the all the three agreements entered into with RUMS, shall be 9954/995423 – Und
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d u/s. 97 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 and MP Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter also referred to CGST Act and MPSGT Act respectively) by Vihan Enterprises (hereinafter also referred to as applicant), registered under the Goods Services Tax. 2. The provisions of the CGST Act and MPGST Act are identical, except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a specific mention of the dissimilar pro-vision is made, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provision under the MPGST Act. Further, henceforth, for the purposes of this Advance Ruling, a reference to such a similar provision under the CGST or MPGST Act would be mentioned as being under the GST Act. 3. Facts of the case as per the Applicant: 3.1 The applicant is engaged, inter alia, in Construction, Erection, Commissioning and Installation of projects relating to Electrical Transmission Lines, Sub-Stations and Line Shifting. 3.2 Rewa Ultra Mega Solar Limited (hereinafter re
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
under World Bank Financing. 3.4 Under the agreements with the RUMS, the scope of work involves supply of all Transmission Line material and sub-station Equipments (excluding Power Transformers, its associated accessories and oil), Station Transformers, Fabricated, Galvanized sub-station Structures and other materials, with related civil works, erection work and testing/commissioning for construction of new 33/220 kV pooling sub-stations, transmission lines and feeder bay work on total Turnkey basis. The scope of the contract also involves construction of 33/220kV pooling sub-station, Transmission Lines and Feeder Bay Work. 3.5 The contract allotted to Vihan Enterprises is for a work which is part of evacuation infrastructure being exclusively for Solar Power, for a Solar Park and is being developed by Solar Project Park Developer. 3.6 The contracts in question were entered into by RUMS and the applicant prior to the introduction of GST. The rates quoted by the applicant for the contrac
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Bid Identification No. RUMS/2016-17/372/014 (Lot – III) under World Bank Financing shall fall? (iv) What shall be the applicable rate of CGST and SGST on the supply being made under the contract? 5. Record of personal hearing – The matter was taken up for hearing on 8-6-2018 where CA Sandeep Mukherjee attended the hearing for the Applicant. He submitted copies of the letters written by RUMS to the Applicant and MP Power Transmission Co. Limited and requested that the documents be taken into record and reiterated their submissions made in the application. 6. Discussing and findings : 6.1 The application, it was stated by the applicant that as per RUMS, the rate of GST should be 5% since the work is part of evacuation infrastructure being exclusively for Solar Power, for a Solar Park and is being developed by Solar Project Park Developer. Also, as per the letter written to the applicant by RUMS, submitted during the course of the hearing, RUMS has agreed to pay CST @ 5% to applicant til
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
comes to 18%. 6.4 We have perused the contents of the agreement between the applicant and RUMS, more specifically the scope of work in the agreement at para 4 of the agreement. On a reading of the scope of work, it is clear that the work involves both supply of goods and supply of services, which are naturally bundled. Accordingly, under this agreement, the applicant is providing a composite supply within the meaning of Section 2 of the CGST Act, 2017. 6.5 The agreement involves construction of. Pooling sub-station on Turnkey Basis and falls under the definition of a "Works Contract" within the meaning of Section 2 of the CGST Act, 2017. The definition is as under: "works contract" means a contract for building, construction, fabrication, completion, erection, installation, fitting out, improvement, modification, repair, maintenance, renovation, alteration or commissioning of any immovable property wherein transfer of property in goods (whether as goods or in some
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Headings 84 and 85, as given in Sl. No. 234 of Schedule-I of Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rates) is for supply of goods. The relevant para of the Notification is as under: "G.S.R. (E). – In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017), the Central Government, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby notifies the rate of the Central Tax of – (i) 2.5 per cent, in respect of goods specified in Schedule-I, (ii) 6 per cent, in respect of goods specified in Schedule-II, (iii) 9 per cent, in respect of goods specified in Schedule-III, (iv) 14 per cent, in respect of goods specified in Schedule-IV, (v) 1.5 per cent, in respect of goods specified in Schedule-V, and (vi) 0.125 per cent, in respect of goods specified in Schedule-VI. appended to this notification (hereinafter referred to as the said Schedules), that shall be levied on intra-State supplies of goods, the description of which is specifi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
; Services Tax Act, 2017, involving predominantly earth work (that is, constituting more than 75% of the value of the works contract) provided to the CG, SG, UT, local authority, a Governmental authority or a Government entity. b. Under para 3, clause (x) for Composite supply of works contract as defined in clause (119) of Section 2 of the CGST Act, 2017 provided by a sub-contractor to the main contractor providing services specified in item (vii) above to the CG, SG, UT, a local authority, a Governmental Authority or a Government Entity. c. Under para 3, clause (xi) for Services by way of house-keeping, such as plumbing, carpenting, etc. where the person supplying such service through electronic commerce operator is not liable for registration under sub-section (1) of Section 22 of the CGST Act, 2017. None of the above activities are contemplated in the scope of work under the agreement entered into by the applicant with RUMS. 6.9 It is notable that under the CGST and SGST Acts, Rules
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (10) TMI 682 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – 2018 (18) G. S. T. L. 168 (A. A. R. – GST) – Classification of goods – rate of GST – Reactor used in Hand Pump for water disinfection – Whether the ‘Reactors’ are more appropriately classifiable under Chapter sub heading No. 8421 21 90 attracting CGST of 9%, SGST of 9% and IGST of 18% or otherwise?
–
Held that:- The Reactor manufactured by the applicant is used to purify the water supplied by hand pumps. It may be mentioned here that the main function of a hand pump is to lift water from under the ground and make them available to the public. The hand pump does its work even without the presence of Reactors inside it. Hence it clearly appears that the Reactor is not an essential part of the hand pump – the basic function of the Reactor is ‘purifying the water’ which is different from the function Of the hand pump which is ‘withdrawal and delivery of water from the underground’.
–
The said Reactors are not exclusi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s other places like motorized pipelines, in buildings along with overhead tank, in swimming pools/ fountains, in sewage water treatment in townships, hotels, hospitals, etc. – Reactors have use as water purifier at several places in various pipelines for purification of water and not only in hand pumps. Therefore their claim that their Reactors be treated as parts of hand pumps is not correct.
–
Reactor, in the case of the applicant is nothing but a filtering or purifying machinery/ apparatus for liquids. Apparatus used for filtering or purifying water falls under Heading 8421 21 attracting 9% CGST and SGST each. The Reactor is neither an Ion exchanger plant or apparatus, Household type filter and therefore would fall under the others category i.e. 8421 21 90, thus attracting 9% CGST and SGST each.
–
Ruling:- The Reactors are classifiable under Tariff Heading 8421 21 90 of the GST Tariff – GST @ 9% each. Tax @ of 9% CGST and 9% SGST is applicable on the present goods. – GST-ARA
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
reference to the same provision under the MGST Act. Further to the earlier, henceforth for the purposes of this Advance Ruling, a reference to such a similar provision under the CGST Act / MGST Act would be mentioned as being under the GST Act 02. FACTS AND CONTENTION – AS PER THE APPLICANT The submission (Brief facts of the case), as reproduced verbatim, could be seen thus – Applicant Company is Manufacturer of Reactor used in Hand pump for Water Disinfection. The Reactor harnesses fluid dynamics & kills microbes in water bore well hand-pump & motorized water lines-eliminating water borne diseases such as diarhea, cholera & typhoid. Function of the Product – The Taraltec Reactor for hand pumps harnessess fluid dynamics and kills microbes in water from bore well hand pump eliminating water borne diseases such as diarrhea, cholera & typhoid. The Reactor can be easily retrofitted into the India mark 2 model (the most widely used hand pump in the world) within an hour by
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Taraltech Reactors can take care of this, to above 99% microbe kill. STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS Statement of applicants interpretation of law in respect of question raised on which Advance Ruling is sought. Since applicant s commodity is forming part of Hand Pump it should be classified as HSN No. 8413, 8413 91 as Hand pumps and parts thereof. 03. CONTENTION – AS PER THE CONCERNED OFFICER The submission, as reproduced verbatim, could be seen thus- M/s. Taraltech Solutions Pvt. Ltd, 176, Udyog Bhavan, Sonawala Road, Goregaon (East), Mumbai 400063 (here in after referred to as the applicant ) has filed above detailed application under Section 98 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 104 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 seeking advance ruling on the Classification of goods i.e. Reactor used in Hand Pump for water disinfection. 2. The applicant state that they are manufacturers of reactor used in Hand pump for water disinfection. The Reactor harness fluid dynamics &
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
pally with the machines falling under Chapter 8413. Applicant has been requested to furnish the product details to ascertain the nature and functions of the product. Authority may also like to direct the applicant to furnish the details as required. 4. As per the Harmonised Systems of Nomenclature (HSN) note – (II) part (Section Note 2) of the Section XVI in general parts which are suitable for use solely or principally with the machines or apparatus are classified under same heading. However, the said Rule does not apply to the parts which in themselves constitute an article covered by headings of the Section X VI, shall be classified in their own appropriate heading even if specially designed to work as part of specific machine. This HSN note particularly applies to heading 8413. Therefore, although catalogue and further details are required, from whatever sketchy details of the product provided by the applicant, it prima facie appears that the product in question will not fall under
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Rule 104 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 seeking advance ruling on the Classification of goods (i.e Reactor used in Hand Pump for water disinfection. 2. The applicant state that they are manufacturers of reactor used in Hand pump for water disinfection. The Reactor harness fluid dynamics & Kills microbes in water bore well hand pump & motorised water lines- eliminating water borne diseases such as diarrhoea, cholera & Typhoid. They further state that their commodity is forming part of Hand pump, it should be classified as HSN NO. 8413, 8413 91 as Hand pumps and parts thereof. 3. On scrutiny of the catalogue, designs & write up of the products viz., Reactor submitted by the assessee, the brief nature, characteristics of the said product appears to be as under:- i) The assessee is engaged in manufacture of Reactors , which is essentially used for purification of water being supplied from Hand Pumps. The Reactor is retrofitted on to the Bore well Hand pumps . According to the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ant has further Stated that other application of the reactor in the pipe line are : i) to be fitted for wells, ponds, lakes etc to motorized pipelines. ii) to be fitted in buildings along with overhead tank. iii) swimming pools/ fountains. iv) sewage water treatment in townships, hotels, hospitals etc. From the above, it is felt that the reactors being manufactured are entirely different article having a different purpose and framing them under water pumps will not be correct as they are not meant to be solely used with Hand pumps. It has many other applications. Therefore, it does not appear to be classifiable under Chapter 8413.91 under the category of Hand Pumps and parts thereof . 5. Further, as per HSN Note-(II) part (Section Note 2) of the Section XVI in general parts which are suitable for use solely or principally with the machines or apparatus are classified under same heading. However, the said Rule does not apply to the parts which in themselves constitute an article covered
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
%. 04. HEARING The case was taken up for preliminary hearing on dt. 1804.2018, With respect to admission or rejection of the application when Sh. Anjan Mukherjee, Director along with Sh. Sanjay Makhija and Sh. Amit Desai C.A. appeared and requested for admission of application as per their contentions made in ARA. It was requested to them to provide detailed catalogue along with write up with respect to its function and its use to ARA as well as Jurisdictional Officer. The jurisdictional officer, Ms. Anjana Srinivasan, Supt., Mumbai East Commissionerate, appeared and made written submissions. The application was admitted and final Hearing was held on 05.06.2018, Sh. Anjan Mukherjee, Director along with Sh. Sanjay Makhija and Sh. Amit Desai C.A. appeared and made written and oral submissions. The jurisdictional officer, Ms. Sunita Bhalerao Supt., Mumbai East Commissionerate also appeared and made written submissions. 05. OBSERVATIONS We have perused the records on file and gone through
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
reof. We find that the Reactor manufactured by the applicant is used to purify the water supplied by hand pumps. It may be mentioned here that the main function of a hand pump is to lift water from under the ground and make them available to the public. The hand pump does its work even without the presence of Reactors inside it. Hence it clearly appears that the Reactor is not an essential part of the hand pump. On the basis of the submissions made by the applicant we find that the Reactors have a function which is entirely different from that of a hand pump. Further, a hand pump Will be able to deliver water without the Reactor and thus it can easily be seen that the Reactor cannot be considered as a part of the hand pump. Further, it is observed that the basic function of the Reactor is purifying the water which is different from the function Of the hand pump which is withdrawal and delivery of water from the underground . The applicant has also submitted that their Reactor can be us
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
independent existence as that of a water purifier which can be used in other applications for purification of water. In view of the above, the Reactor does not merit classification under Chapter 8413.91 under the category of Hand Pumps and parts thereof . Further, as per HSN Note-(II) part (Section Note 2) of the Section XVI in general, parts which are suitable for use solely or principally with the machines or apparatus are classified under same heading. However, the said Rule does not apply to the parts which in themselves constitute an article covered by heading of the Section XVI, which shall be classified in their own appropriate heading even if specially designed to work as a part of specific machine. This HSN Note particularly applies to the heading No. 8413. Thus, it is also evident that, even if the present item is specifically designed for Hand Pump, it shall not merit classification under CTH 8413 91. Therefore, from the HSN, it is clear that parts though fitted in hand pum
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ation of water and not only in hand pumps. Therefore their claim that their Reactors be treated as parts of hand pumps is not correct. Now we take up the issue of classification of a Reactor. We reproduce relevant tariff Heading No. 8421.21.90 of the GST Tariff as under:- 8421 Centrifuges, including centrifugal dryers; filtering or purifying machinery and apparatus, for liquids or gases – Unit GST RATES # GST RATES # GST RATES # GST RATES # CGST STATE/UTSGST/UTGST IGST Compensation Cess -Filtering or purifying machinery and apparatus for liquids : u 9% 9% 18% Nil 8421 21 For filtering of purifying water : u 9% 9% 18% Nil 8421 21 10 Ion exchanger plant or apparatus u 9% 9% 18% Nil 8421 21 20 Household type filters u 9% 9% 18% Nil 8421 21 90 Other u 9% 9% 18% Nil 8421 22 00 for filtering or purifying beverages other than water u 9% 9% 18% Nil 8421 23 00 Oil or petrol-filters for internal combustion engines u 9% 9% 18% Nil 8421 29 00 Other u 9% 9% 18% Nil We find that Reactor, in the cas
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – GST – CBIC modifies the procedure for interception of conveyances for inspection of goods in movement, and detention, release and confiscation of such goods and conveyances, a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Customs – Effective rates of customs duty and IGST for goods imported into India. – Notification as amended from time to time. – TMI Updates – Highlights
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 21-6-2018 – In line with the commitment of Government to liquidate all pending GST refunds filed till 30th April, 2018, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has successfully concluded the 2nd Special Refund Fortnight extended from 31st May, 2018 to 16th June, 2018. By the end of 16th June, 2018, ₹ 6,087 crore IGST refund has been sanctioned in the refund fortnight. The interesting facts during the second fortnight are (i) about 1,68,191 shipping bills have been processed (ii) IGST refund claims of about 9,293 exporters have been sanctioned including about 3500 new exporters, whose refunds had been held up, have got their refund sanctioned. During the period, all field formation
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
an amount of ₹ 1,548 crores was sanctioned by the Centre and ₹ 2,290 crores by the States. This takes the amount of RFD-01A refund claims disposed, as on 16.06.2018, by the Centre to ₹ 10,824 crores and by the States to ₹ 7,287 crores. Thus, the total amount of RFD-01A claims disposed off stands at ₹ 18,111 crores. In all, ₹ 21,142 crore (IGST refunds), ₹ 9,923 crore (RFD-01A refund by CBIC) and ₹ 6,997 crore (RFD-01A refund by States) all totaling ₹ 38,062 crore has been sanctioned till 16th June, 2018. Considering the amount of rejected claims, the total IGST disposed is ₹ 23,437 Crore, RFD-01A (by CBIC) is ₹ 10,824 crore, RFD-01A (by States) is ₹ 7, 287 crore and to
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – GST – By: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal – Dated:- 21-6-2018 – Liquor companies have now come out of demonetization, highway sales ban and Goods and Services Tax (GST) hangover and can be said to be in high spirits, if the numbers are to be believed. Infact 2018 so far has seen revival of demand of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) by 2-3 percent, which was in negative for last two years. The slow down during 2016-2018 was mainly due to adverse effect of demonetization in November, 2016 followed by highway sale ban by Supreme Court in March, 2017 and then GST w.e.f. 1st July, 2017. The impact of all these one after the other reasons have largely stabilized and business can be said to be near normal now. On whether to include
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ring liquor. The rest is used by the pharmaceutical industry to manufacture cough syrups and the cosmetics industry to make perfumes. It may be noted that industrial alcohol is already under the GST net. If this happens, alco-beverages sector will enter another complex situation, viz, ENA being subjected to GST whereas output, i.e., alco-beverages being out of GST net, leading to enhanced cost of production without any set off benefit of input taxes in the form of GST. It may be technically correct to levy GST on ENA as it is not a potable liquor (meant for human consumption), yet it will bring in more distortions but of course, more revenue too to the exchequer. However, the VAT paid on the purchase of ENA can be used as a set-off on the V
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – 49/23/2018 – Dated:- 21-6-2018 – Circular No. 49/23/2018-GST F. No. CBEC/20/16/03/2017-GST Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs GST Policy Wing **** New Delhi, Dated the 21st June, 2018 To, The Principal Chief Commissioners / Chief Commissioners / Principal Commissioners /Commissioners of Central Tax (All) / The Principal Directors General / Directors General (All) Madam/Sir, Subject: Modifications to the procedure for interception of conveyances for inspection of goods in movement, and detention, release and confiscation of such goods and conveyances, as clarified in Circular No. 41/15/2018-GST dated 13.04.2018 -reg. Circular No. 41/15/2018-GST d
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ld read as: In view of the above, the goods and conveyance(s) are hereby released on (DD/MM/YYYY) at ____ AM/PM. 3.0 Further, it is stated that as per rule 138C (2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, where the physical verification of goods being transported on any conveyance has been done during transit at one place within a State or Union territory or in any other State or Union territory, no further physical verification of the said conveyance shall be carried out again in the State or Union territory, unless a specific information relating to evasion of tax is made available subsequently. Since the requisite FORMS are not available on the common portal currently, any action initiated by the State tax officers is not bein
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s valid e-way bills and/or other relevant documents in respect of twenty consignments, but is unable to produce the same with respect to the remaining five consignments, detention/confiscation can be made only with respect to the five consignments and the conveyance in respect of which the violation of the Act or the rules made thereunder has been established by the proper officer. 4. It is requested that suitable trade notices may be issued to publicise the contents of this Circular. 5. Difficulties, if any, in implementation of the above instructions may be brought to the notice of the Board at an early date. Hindi version will follow. (Upender Gupta) Commissioner (GST) – Circular – Trade Notice – Public Notice – Instructions – Office ord
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (7) TMI 93 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – duty paying documents – case of Revenue is that such credit was availed by the appellant on the input documents issued prior to 14.03.2003 which is violative of Service Tax Credit (Second Amendment) Rules, 2003 framed under N/N. 5/2003 dated 14.05.2003 vide sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 – Held that:- The payment in respect of all bills were made after 14.05.2003 and the cenvat credit was availed by the appellant between July 2013 and September 2013, as found from the appeal memo, which covers the case under proviso annexed to Rule 3 – appellant had not availed any cenvat credit in violation of Rule 3(1)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2002 (second amendment) – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal No. ST/88138/17 – Order No. A/86777 / 2018 – Dated:- 21-6-2018 – Hon ble Dr. Suvendu Kumar Pati, Member ( Judicial ) Shri Keval Shah, Advocate for the appellant Shri Vivek Dwivedi, AC (AR) for the respondent ORDER Refusal of cenva
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d by the appellant on the input documents issued prior to 14.03.2003 which is violative of Service Tax Credit (Second Amendment) Rules, 2003 framed under Notification no 5/2003 dated 14.05.2003 vide sub-rule (1) of Rule 3. Reply to Showcause notice was found not convincing in its totality and vide his order dated 30.10.2008 Jt. Commissioner of Service tax, Mumbai allowed cenvat credit of ₹ 9,911/- as he found some bills/ challans had fallen under same category of taxable service for which credit is admissible under Rule 3(1)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2002 but confirmed the demand of ₹ 8,07,650/- holding availment of such cenvat credit as inadmissible along with interest at appropriate rate and penalty of same amount demanded. 3. In his memo of appeal and during course of hearing of appeal, the ld. Counsel for the appellant Shri Keval Shah submitted that the Ld. Commissioner has erred in not allowing cenvat credit and also erred in invoking the extended period of limitation
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
case input service for which invoice/ challan issued after the 14th day of May 2003 would only be considered for service tax credit as found under annexure A to the show-cause notice. All those bills are raised before the appointed day and therefore he justified the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and first adjudicating authority and sought no interference by this Tribunal. 5. Heard both sides at length and perused the relevant amended rule of 2002 and the documents placed on record. Before going to the legality of availment of cenvat credit by the appellant, the issue to be considered by the court which also includes interpretation of cenvat credit in respect of input services used for providing of output services. Ld. Counsel for the appellant was appraised that such interpretation concerning the classification of services is not within the competency of this single bench jurisdiction to which he replied that he would accept the order of the adjudicating authority to the e
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
or bill or challan is issued on or after the fourteenth day of May, 2003: Provided that the output service provider shall be allowed to take such credit, on or after the day on which he makes payment of the value of input service and the service tax paid or payable as indicated in invoice or bill or challan referred to in sub-rule (1) of rule 5. 6. As found from the orders passed by the first adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as referred in the show-cause notices, the grounds for upholding such availment of cenvat credit as inadmissible, only sub-rule (a) and (b) of Rule 3(1) has been referred and the proviso annexed thereof has been ignored by the respondent department and the adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority. In drawing the attention of this court to Annexure A of notice to show-cause which contains a column as the date of payment, the ld. Counsel for the appellant indicated payment in respect of all bills/ invoices were made after 14.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (7) TMI 420 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Valuation – job-worker or not? – appellant entered into agreement with M/s.Honeywell Electrical Devices and Systems India Ltd. on manufacture on contract basis – Department took the view that Sujhan had simply been acting as job worker for Honeywell; that the entire manufacturing activities were controller by Honeywell as principal manufacturer; that Honeywell fixed ordinary sale price of the impugned goods; Hence value adopted for payment of duty by Sujhan is not the sole consideration for sale as per Section 4 (1) (a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – whether the activities of M/s.Sujhan Instruments are to be treated as those of a ‘job worker’ on behalf of M/s.Honeywell i.e. ‘job worker to principal’?
–
Held that:- A perusal of the SCN No. 104/2009 dt. 23.10.2009 reveals that department is inclined to treat Sujhan as a job worker of Honeywell primarily on the grounds that supplies of raw materials that required to be approved by the latt
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ing’ as distinguished from ‘job worker’. The contract manufacturers are not supplied with the raw material from principal manufacturers, like ‘job workers’, butthey are required to purchase them from the market, very often from vendors who are approved by the principal manufacturer for quality point of view – there is no reason on account of invoice value between Sujhan and Honeywell should not be treated as the ‘transaction value’ under Section 4 (1) (a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
–
We draw sustenance from the ratio of the Tribunal’s decision in Coromandal Paints [2010 (9) TMI 315 – CESTAT, BANGALORE], where it was held that by merely indicating vendors of raw materials or by giving advance for procuring raw material or even installing equipment given by SIPL would not render Coromandal as a job worker.
–
Appeal allowed. – E/810/2010, E/1/2011, E/40261/2014, E/40964/2013, E/40965/2013 – Final Order No. 41924-41928 / 2018 – Dated:- 21-6-2018 – Hon ble Shri Madhu Mohan Dam
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d) There is a difference of 200 to 400% in the sale price of the goods from M/s.Honeywell when compared to the sale price ofthe assessee to M/s.Honeywell. e) Thebrand name is owned by M/s.Honeywell and the intellectual property rights of the products manufactured by the assessee rest with M/s.Honeywell. f) With the affixing of the brand name, as the ownership of the products rests with M/s.Honeywell, the assessee has no right to sell the goods. g) When there is no right to sell the goods, the amount received by the asessee is only compensation of the expenditure incurred by the assessee and received by him through sale invoices raised. h) the declaration made in the MRP stickers as Specially manufactured for Honeywell Electrical Devices and Systems India Ltd. by M/s.Sujhan Instruments, 54, 4th Street, Kasi Estate, Jafferkhanpet, Chennai 600 083 also confirm that the goods are manufactured for M/s.Honeywell. Department took the view that Sujhan had simply been acting as job worker for
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
dated 03.09.10 – 1,77,73,275/ – 1,77,73,275/- E/00001/2011 (Appeal by Honeywell for Penalty) April 2007 – July 2009 – 20/2010 dated 03.09.10 2,00,000/- E/40964/2013 (Appeal by Department) April 2010 – March 2011 12/2011 dated 25.04.11 12/2012 dated 29.02.12 12& 13/2013 dated 30.01.13 13,49,816/- 20,000/- E/40965/2013 (Appeal by Department) April 2011 – January 2012 8/2012 dated 20.04.12 12/2012 dated 08.08.12 12& 13/2013 dated 30.01.13 3,58,663/- 2,000/- E/40261/2014 (Appeal by Sujhan) August 2009 – March 2010 61/2010 dated 12.08.10 58/2011 dated 22.06.11 222/2013 dated 22.11.13 31,17,332/- 25,000/- In adjudication, in respect of appeal E/810/2010 & E/00001/2011, the notices were adjudicated by the Commissioner vide OIO No.20/2010dated 03.09.2010 who confirmed the proposals,hence these appeals by Sujhan and Honeywell. 3. In appeals E/40964 & 40965/2013, the adjudicating authorities were of the level of Additional Commissioner, who confirmed the proposals in the respect
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
. job worker to principal or b) whether activities of M/s.Sujhan Instruments are to be treated as manufacture and relationship between M/s.Sujhan and M/s.Honeywell is on a principal to principal basis . ii) Ld. Advocate submits that the issue should have been framed in the other way round and that only after eliminating the applicability of Section 4 (1) (a) of the Act in respect of transactions between Sujhan and Honeywell, should the adjudicating authority have gone further ahead to agitate the applicability of Rule 10 (a) of the Valuation Rules. iii) As per Section 4 (1) (a) of the Act, the transaction is generally required to be adopted as the value of goods for the purpose of charging duty of excise in the cases. Department has not adduced any evidence to prove that the sale of goods between Sujhan and Honeywell have not satisfied any of the ingredients of Section 4 (1) (a) or have not satisfied the definition of transaction value in that section. iv) Rule 10 (a) was introduced in
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
(a) cannot be invoked. Ld. Advocate relies upon the Tribunal decision in Coromandel Paints Ltd. Vs Commissioner of C. Ex., Visakhapatnam – 2010 (260) ELT 440 (Tri.) where it was clearly held that no duty demand on this ground can be raised against the assessee. viii) In respect of Appeals E/40964/2013 & E/40965/2013 filed by the department, Ld. Advocate submits that common impugned order No.12 & 13/2012 dt. 30.1.2013 of commissioner (Appeals) has gone into all aspects of matter and arrived at the reasoned finding that the relationship between Sujhan and Honeywell is only on principal to principal and that there is no complete control of the manufacturing process of the former by the latter. Ld. Advocate therefore submits that there is no merit in the departmental appeals and they may therefore be rejected. 6. On the other hand, Ld.A.R Shri K.P.Muralidharan supports the impugned orders. 7. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts of these cases. 8.1 Ld. Advocate has foun
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
asis,since the second alternative issue framed in para 11.1 of that impugned order is just very that. 8.3 A perusal of the SCN No.104/2009 dt. 23.10.2009 reveals that department is inclined to treat Sujhan as a job worker of Honeywell primarily on the grounds that supplies of raw materials that required to be approved by the latter, quality control exercised by Honeywell, 99%of the finished goods are sold to the latter and that Honeywell s brand name and MRP stickers are used on the packing. The Rule 10A has been inserted in the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, w.e.f. 1.4.2007. As per this rule, the value at which principal manufacturer sells his goods will be the basis for determining the transaction value for payment of Central Excise duty by the job worker. For the purpose of this rule, the job worker is defined as …. a person engaged in the manufacturer or production of goods on behalf of a principal manufacturer, from any inputs or
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e of Central Excise duty on the assessable value and the value indicated in the invoices from Sujhan to Honeywell. 8.5 Thus just because the goods manufactured or produced by Sujhan are purchased by Honeywell on contract that should detract from acceptance of the transaction between Sujhan and Honeywell to be one of principal to principal basis. The arrangement between Sujhan and Honeywell, in our view, is on the lines of contract manufacturing as distinguished from job worker . The contract manufacturers are not supplied with the raw material from principal manufacturers, like job workers , butthey are required to purchase them from the market, very often from vendors who are approved by the principal manufacturer for quality point of view. The principal then buys finished products from the contract margin and very often sales them to his core customer, sometimes with enhanced margin. Department has also not unearthed or brought out anything on record to suspect that the contract betw
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
al following the ratio already laid down in Gillette Diversified Operations Ltd. Vs Commissioner – 2007 (217) ELT 51 (Tribunal) held that by merely indicating vendors of raw materials or by giving advance for procuring raw material or even installing equipment given by SIPL would not render Coromandal as a job worker. 9. In view of the findings and conclusions herein above and following the ratio already laid down by Tribunal in Coromandal Paints Ltd. (supra), impugned order No.20/2010 dt. 03.09.2010 (relating to Appeals E/810/2010 and E/1/2011) are set aside and the said appeals are allowed in toto with consequential benefits, if any, as per law. 10. So also, the order of Commissioner (Appeals) No.222/2013 dt. 22.11.2013 (impugned order for Appeal E/40261/2014) is also set aside and the said appeal is also allowed with consequential benefits, if any, as per law. 11. For the same reasons, we do not find any infirmity in the orders No.12 & 13/2013 dt. 30.01.2013 (impugned orders for
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (7) TMI 789 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Benefit of Rule 6(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 – Insertion of sub-rule 3AA in Cenvat Credit (Third amendment) Rules, 2016 with effect from 01.04.2016 – Held that:- Sub-rule 3AA says that manufacturer or a provider of output service who failed to exercise the option provided under sub-rule (3) is supposed to be given a chance by the competent authority to follow the procedure and pay the amount referred in clause 2 of sub-rule 3.
–
In view of non-extension of benefit provided under Rule 6(5) to the appellant by the adjudicating authority to the appellant which would require production and scrutinisation of documentary evidence. It is a fit case which should be remanded to the original adjud
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
case it would have been allowed credit of ₹ 78,038/- for the year 2009-10 and ₹ 1,08,402/- for the year 2010-11. Further, Rule 6(3) formula would have been reduced duty liability to ₹ 2,34,549/- against duty demand of ₹ 5,39,664/-, besides other issues relating to the nature of business if covered under the definition of trading and exemption category etc. During the course of hearing also, insertion of sub-rule 3AA in Cenvat Credit (Third amendment) Rules, 2016 with effect from 01.04.2016 and the underlying spirit thereof has been discussed. 2. In the presence of ld. Counsel for the appellant Shri P.K. Shetty and Ld. AR, Shri Atul Sharma, applicability of sub-rule 3AA to the appellant s case, since adjudication ord
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e rate of fifteen per cent per annum from the due date for payment of amount for each of the month, till the date of payment thereof. In view of the above referred rule, manufacturer or a provider of output service who failed to exercise the option provided under sub-rule (3) is supposed to be given a chance by the competent authority to follow the procedure and pay the amount referred in clause 2 of sub-rule 3. 4. In view of the above procedure and in view of non-extension of benefit provided under Rule 6(5) to the appellant by the adjudicating authority to the appellant which would require production and scrutinisation of documentary evidence. I consider it to be a fit case which should be remanded to the original adjudicating authority f
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (7) TMI 1589 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI – Benefit of N/N. 1/2011-CE dated 01.03.2011 – availability of CENVAT Credit on inputs and utilization of the same by beneficiary of the notification – demand of Interest and penalty – Held that:- The appellants have complied with all the necessary statutory returns within the stipulated time and the fact of claiming exemption benefit was disclosed in the ER-1 returns filed during the relevant period. It is also not in dispute that the appellants paid the entire duty amount through the CENVAT Account and thereafter, through the current account, thereby, causing no loss of Revenue to the exchequer.
–
The mistake seems to be that of procedural and irregularities – the subsequent payment in cash was the only action by which procedural irregularities could be rectified.
–
The appellant has made out a case for non-imposition of penalty and also for setting aside the demand of interest – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appea
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
tted). Show Cause Notice dated 15.01.2013 was issued alleging that the appellant-assessee while availing benefit of Notification No.1/2011-CE (Supra) made payment of Central Excise duty availing the CENVAT Credit account whereas the same should have been made from Current Account. It is the case of the Revenue that the beneficiaries of the aforesaid notification cannot avail the CENVAT Credit on inputs and utilize the same for payment of Central Excise duty. Show Cause Notice proposed to demand and recover an amount of ₹ 43,38,830/- through the current account alongwith interest and to impose penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of ₹ 31,22,159/- and dropped the demand to the tune of ₹ 12,16,671/- and appropriated the amount of ₹ 31,22,159/- as paid by the appellants. Penalty of ₹ 31,22,159/- was also imposed on the appellant under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Order-in
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
entral Excise duty on clearance of fertilizers under the said Notification the imposition of penalty under Section 11AC is unwarranted. 4. It is the contention of the Ld. Counsel that the statutory returns were filed by the appellants with the Department showing the payment of duty from CENVAT Account and the Department regularized and allowed the benefit of exemption Notification on payment of entire duty amount by cash. The matter being that of interpretation, it cannot be construed that there was suppression with intent to evade payment of duty and having submitted monthly returns showing availment of CENVAT Credit, penalty under Section 11AC is not imposable. Further, the Ld. Counsel argued that Section 3(1) Central Excise Act, 1944 provides that the duty of Excise is to be called as Central Value Added Tax. As there was no non-payment of duty in the present case, payment of interest is not sustained. He relied on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Exci
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
se Act, it is necessary to prove that there was fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty on the part of the appellant. From the perusal of records, I do not find any ingredients of willful misstatement, suppression of facts etc. with intent to evade payment of duty. There is also no suppression or mis-representation in respect of availment of CENVAT Credit. 8. I find that in the present case, the appellant was not retaining any money due to the Government. The subsequent payment in cash was the only action by which procedural irregularities could be rectified. 9. I find that the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Banco Products (India) Ltd. (Supra) by relying upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. Vulcan Gears [2009] 23 STT 472 (Ahd.-CESTAT), rejected the Revenue s appeal before them. By following the view taken by the Tribunal in the case referred to above, I do not con
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
GST – States – POL-56/3/2017-Policy/9160/CT – Dated:- 21-6-2018 – Commissionerate of CT and GST, Odisha (At Cuttack) (Finance Department, Government of Odisha) NO. POL-56/3/2017-Policy/9160/CT, Dated: 21/06/2018 To Director (Finance) Odisha Forest Development Corporation Bhubaneswar Sub: Clarification on GST rate applicable on services rendered by way of plantation activities Sir, I am directed to clarify the issue raised in your letter referred to above as below. Query:- Entities such as NPTC, MCL, NHAI, etc place funds with OFDC for carrying out plantation activities including compensatory afforestation activities. Whether such plantation service provided to such entities by OFDC is taxable under GST and, if yes, at what rate (OFDC is registered under GST laws). Clarification:- The services provided by OFDC as mentioned above is classified, as given below, under the Scheme of Classification of Services. Section-9985 (Support services) Heading-99859 (Other Support Services) Service C
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Classification of Services' is enclosed herewith for your reference. This is issued with the approval of the Commissioner of CT & GST. Yours faithfully Additional Commissioner CT & GST (Policy) Memo No. 916/CT., Dated. 21.06.2018 i. organization and management of trade shows and trade fairs and provision of assistance and support services, including components such as advice and consultancy services with respect to all aspects of the organization of trade shows and trade fairs including defining objectives, financing, e.g., through sponsorship, exhibitions, loans and registration fees, estimating income and expenditure budgets and other financial matters; ii. assistance in choosing and locating space, venue research, feasibility and negotiation; marketing and public relations for the trade show or trade fair; organization or provision of secretariat and office facilities and staff for trade show or trade fair registration, administration, documentation handling, translatio
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nery for buildings (roof gardens, facade greenery, indoor gardens); sports grounds, play grounds and other recreational parks (sports grounds, play grounds, lawns for sunbathing, golf courses); stationary and flowing water (basins, alternating wet areas, ponds, swimming pools, ditches, watercourses, plant sewage systems); plants for protection against noise, wind, erosion, visibility and dazzling 998598 Other information services This service code includes telephone-based information services, information search services, news clipping services, press clipping services etc. This service code does not include telephone call centre services, cf. 998593 998599 Other support services n.e.c. This service code includes business brokerage and appraisal services other than for real estate; business services of intermediaries and brokers; specialist advice other than for real estate, insurance and engineering (specialist services in art, specialist services for courts of law, etc.); services by
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
facilities operation services, cf. 999623 management services for artistic rights, cf. 999629 sports events organization services, cf. 999651 9986 Support services to agriculture, hunting, forestry, fishing, mining and utilities 99861 Support services to agriculture, hunting, forestry, and fishing 998611 Support services to crop production This service code includes i. services to improve the propagation quality of the seed, including treatment of genetically modified seeds; removal of non-seed materials, undersized, mechanically or insect-damaged and immature seeds; removal of seed moisture to a safe level for seed storage; drying, cleaning, grading and treating of seeds to be marketed; ii. post-harvest crop services such as preparation of crops for primary markets, cotton ginning services; iii. Other support services to crop production like tilling of fields preparatory to planting; planting, cultivation and fertilization of crops; spraying, including from the air; iv. pest control
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ing services for pets; training of pet animals; Farm animal husbandry services on inputs owned by others like operation of a farm animal production unit on a fee or contract basis This service code does not include: services provided by agronomists and agricultural economists, cf. 998311 veterinary services for pets and other animals, cf. 99835 training of guard dogs cf. 998529 recreational riding services, cf. 999652 training of sport and entertainment animals cf. 999662 998613 Support services to hunting This service code includes services involving operation of a hunting unit on a fee or contract basis; culling of wildlife 998614 Support services to forestry and logging This service code includes services involving operation of a forestry or logging unit on a fee or contract basis; forest tree nursery services; services related to forestry production, such as transplanting, replanting, thinning, forestry inventories, timber evaluation, fire protection; services related to logging, s
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
uishing services; operation of oil or gas extraction unit on a fee or contract basis This service code does not include: geological, geophysical and related prospecting and consulting services, cf. 998341 998622 Support services to other mining n.e.c. This service code includes draining and pumping of mines; overburden removal and other development and preparation services of mineral properties and sites, including tunneling, except for oil and gas extraction; test drilling services in connection with mining operations, except for oil and gas extraction; operation of other mining units on a fee or contract basis This service code does not include: mineral exploration and evaluation services, cf. 998343 geophysical services, cf. 998341 99863 Support and operation services to electricity, gas and water distribution 998631 Support services to electricity transmission and distribution This service code includes support services to electricity transmission and distribution services. 998632
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Applicability of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (Integrated Tax) on goods supplied while being deposited in a custom bonded warehouse. – GST – States – 2079/GST-II – Dated:- 21-6-2018 Circular – T
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (11) TMI 708 – CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – [2018] 2 GSTL 133 (Cal) – Non-availability of the Appellate Forum – Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – West Bengal Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 – Held that:- The impugned order being appealable, it would be appropriate to permit the petitioner to exhaust its statutory alternative remedy before the appropriate forum – petition disposed off. – WP 8564(W) of 2018 Dated:- 21-6-2018 – Debangsu Basak, J. Mr. Piyal Gupta, Ms. Shweta Mukherjee, Ms. Sweta Gandhi, for the petitioner. Mr. Debashis Basu, for Union of India. Mr. Abhratosh Majumder, ld. Addl. A.G., Mr. Soumitra Mukherjee, Mr. Avra Mazumder, for the State. JUDGMENT An order dated April 9, 2018 passed under Sectio
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
