Tax Audit Report Changes: GAAR and GST Reporting in Form 3CD Deferred Until March 31, 2019.
Circulars
Income Tax
Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB – Form 3CD – the proposed clause 30C and proposed cl
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Court Rules Cab Fare Subject to GST; Company Must Pay Tax on Customer Payments u/s 9 of GST Act.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – Whether the money paid by the customer to the driver of the cab fo
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
E-Unit to Diamond Conversion Now Taxable Under Goods and Services Tax Act: Supply of Diamonds.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – Supply or not – The conversion of e-Units into diamonds would consti
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Derivative Contracts in E-Units Settled Without Physical Diamonds Exempt from GST as Securities Transactions.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – diamonds – e-units – The derivative contracts in e-Un
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
GST Reverse charge liability u/s 9(3) and 9(4) of CGST Act, 2017
By: – Ganeshan Kalyani
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 17-8-2018
Normally, GST is payable by a taxable person supplying goods or services or both. However, in some cases, GST is payable by the person receiving the goods or services or both. This is termed as reverse charge mechanism. The term 'reverse charge' as defined in the Act is reproduced below:
''reverse charge'' means the liability to pay tax by the recipient of goods or services or both instead of the supplier of goods or services or both under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) of section 9, or under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) of section 5 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act;''
There are two provisions under which GST is payable under reverse charge:
A) The first one is payable under section 9(3) of CGST Act, 2017. A list of goods and services on which the tax is payable under the said section is notified thru notificat
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
tax shall be paid by the lottery distributor or selling agent, being the recipient of supply of said goods.
The category of services enumerated in the notification no. 13/2017 are discussed below in detail:
Goods Transport Agency (GTA):
A Goods Transport Agency (GTA) means any person who provides service in relation to transport of goods by road and issues consignment note, by whatever name called. The tax on GTA service is payable by the recipient being any factory registered under or governed by the Factories Act, 1948; or any society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 or under any other law for the time being in force in any part of India; or any co-operative society established by or under any law; or any person registered under the CGST Act or IGST Act or the SGST Act or the UTGST Act; or any body corporate established, by or under any law; or any partnership firm whether registered or not under any law including association of person; or any casual taxable p
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
dated 28.06.2017.
Legal consultancy service:
A legal consultancy service means any service supplied in relation to advice, consultancy or assistance in any branch of law, in any manner and includes representational services before any court, tribunal or authority. Any business entity located in the taxable territory receiving legal service from an individual advocate including a senior advocate or firm of advocates by way of legal services, directly or indirectly shall pay tax under reverse charge basis.
A service provided by a partnership firm of advocate or an individual as an advocate other than a senior advocate, by way of legal service to an advocate or partnership firm of advocates providing legal services; or to any person other than a business entity; or to a business entity with an aggregate turnover up to twenty lakh rupees (ten lakh rupees in the case of a special category states) in the preceding financial year; or to the Central Government, State Government, Union Terri
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Department of Posts by way of speed post, express parcel post, life insurance, and agency services provided to a person other than Central Government, State Government or Union territory or local authority; services in relation to an aircraft or a vessel, inside or outside the precincts of a port or an airport; and transport of goods or passengers.
A person registered under the CGST Act, 2017 shall pay tax on the services of renting of immovable property received from the Central Government, State Government, Union territory or local authority, services
Service supplied by a Director of a company or a body corporate:
The company or a body corporate located in the taxable territory shall pay GST under reverse charge on receiving service from a director of a company or a body corporate.
Service supplied by an insurance agent:
Any person carrying on insurance business, located in the taxable territory shall pay GST under reverse charge on the services supplied by an insurance agent.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
any or a non-banking financial company located in the taxable territory shall pay tax under reverse charge on receiving service from an individual direct selling agent other than a body corporate, partnership or limited liability partnership firm.
B) GST liability u/s 9(4) of CGST Act, 2017
The second method of payment of GST under reverse charge is provided u/s 9(4) of CGST Act. As per the said provision a registered person shall pay tax on receiving goods or services or both from a person who is not registered under GST.
Further, vide Notification no. 8/2017-CTR dated 28.06.2017 the tax payment as required u/s 9(4) was exempted if the aggregate value of the supplies of goods or services or both received by a registered person from any or all the suppliers, who is or are not registered does not exceeds ₹ 5000/-.
Thereafter, the provision of section 9(4) of CGST Act, was suspended till 31.03.2018 vide Notification no. 38/2017-CTR dated 13.10.2017. It was again suspended till
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
under GST and collected GST , is RCM still applicable for specified catagory of persons?
Dated: 18-8-2018
Reply By KASTURI SETHI as =
In that situation, only FCM is applicable.
Dated: 18-8-2018
Reply By GAJESH GUPTA as =
Sir,
As per recent notification Government has finally imposed the Reverse Charge Mechanism starting from 01.02.2019.
Please confirm whether it is for 9(3) and 9(4) and both of GST act.
Dated: 11-2-2019
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani as =
It is for Section 9(4). However, the list of person who shall pay tax under reverse charge on purchase from an unregistered dealer is not yet notified.
Dated: 12-2-2019
Reply By SHUBHAM AHUJA as =
DEAR SIR
AS PER LATEST NOTIFICATION OF RCM UNDER SECTION 9(4) IS IT EFFECTIVE FROM 01.02.2019 , CAN YOU PLEASE RCM UNDER SECTION 9(3) WAS SUSPENDED OR NOT
Dated: 1-3-2019
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani as =
RCM under Sec 9 (3) is already inforce. Security service is being added from 1st Jan 2019.
Dated: 1-3-2019
Reply By SHUBHA
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Can i Claim
Query (Issue) Started By: – Harish GV Dated:- 17-8-2018 Last Reply Date:- 20-8-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
Im a self employee & providing software services to inside/outside India, all my services transactions was credited to my personal saving bank account, but first time I provided software service to US within few days ago and received very big amount to my personal saving bank account and not yet converted to Indian currency(Bank needs disposal instructions for FOREX department to convert it into Indian currency and credit to my bank account).
Later I opened current account with trade name(sole proprietorship), registered the GST, Taken LUT Bond, within a one or two days i'm getting
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
use that money for hiring employees and renting new office, etc..?
Thanks
Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN:
The Reply:
Whether the invoices were issued in the name of sole proprietorship or in the name of individual?
Reply By Harish GV:
The Reply:
Thank you for replying Dr. Mariappan Govindarajan
From the buyer side i received invoice in the name of individual
Reply By ANITA BHADRA:
The Reply:
Dear Sir
point wise reply to your query :-
(a) Point of taxable event for software exporter is – Earliest of Advance Received,/ Provision of services/Invoice raised ..
In your case point of taxable event is PROVISION OF SERVICES
(b) GST REGISTRATION FOR SOFTWARE EXPORT SERVICES
export service is an inter-state taxable supply and liable
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ing month ( the date you received advance / registered in GST )
USE OF MONEY
In GST Act , use of money is not restricted . As long as you are paying applicable GST , The only concern is availing Input Tax Credit on payment for business purpose .
You can claim refund for input expenditure made in course of export of services.
Reply By Harish GV:
The Reply:
Thank you Anita Bhadra mam for replying
and thank you clarifying about the Advance Payment, what i received is a full payment of service and service was exported before receiving the payment itself, i listed details below with time frame
* Service was exported on 25th July 2018
* July 27th 2018 i received amount to my personal saving bank account, invoice sent from the buyer i
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Tax Audit Report – For 3CD – reporting of information regarding GAAR and GST deferred.
06/2018 Dated:- 17-8-2018 Circular
Income Tax
Circular No. 6/2018
F. No. 370142/9/2018-TPL
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Direct Taxes
TPL Division
****
New Delhi, Dated the 17th of August, 2018
Order under section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961
Section 44AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') read with rule 6G of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ('the Rules') requires prescribed persons to furnish the Tax Audit Report along with the prescribed particulars in Form No. 3CD. The existing Form No. 3CD was amended vide notification no. GSR 666(E) dated 20th July, 2018 with effect from 20th Augu
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
IN RE: AAKASH ENGINEERS
GST
2018 (9) TMI 699 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, DAMAN, DIU AND DADAR AND NAGAR HAVELI – 2018 (17) G. S. T. L. 40 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, DAMAN, DIU AND DADAR AND NAGAR HAVELI – AAR
Dated:- 17-8-2018
Order No. 03/AR/Daman-Silvassa/2018
GST
SHRI SATISH KUMAR AND SHRI KANNAN GOPINATHAN, IAS MEMBER
Any person deeming himself aggrieved by this Advance Ruling may appeal against the Ruling before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, in terms of Section 100 of the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017. Such appeal shall be done within 30 days from the date of the communication of the order. The appeal papers shall bear fee of Rs. 10,000/- as provided under Rule 106(1) of the Central Goods & Service Tax Rules,2017.
The Appeal should be filed in Form GST ARA-02, prescribed under sub-rule (1) of Rule 106 & GST ARA-03 of the Central Goods & Service Tax Rules, 2017, as the case maybe, duly signed by the person specif
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Cargo Trolley used to carry Cargo from one place to another, towable in nature and has solid tyre design for transportation of baggage and light cargo with a minimum payload. The trolley is rugged and is suitable and treated for outdoor use.
To verily the facts, application of the assessee was forward vide letter F.No. V/AR-07/Aakash/DUM/2017-18 dtd 24.05.2018 to the Assistant commissioner, Div-VI, GST& CR Silvassa, Daman Commissionerate for examination and their detailed reports on the following points was called for:-
I. Classification of the said goods under Central Excise Tariff Act,1985;
II. Whether any issue on the subject matter has been decided by the appellate Authority In their own case of the assessee or other cases. If Yes, please furnish the copy of the said orders;
Ill. What is prevalling practice of classification of the product In question? and
IV. Their report on classification of the subject goods under GST regime with supporting Case Laws/Notifications/Circulars
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ge/cargo trolly used at Air Cargo Complex/Airport for shifting baggage/goods/parcels from airline warehouse to on board the flights and vice versa. On going through the GST Tariff Act, 2017, it is noticed that there is no specific entry for the said product. However, it appears to be classifible under heading 87168090.
3. Defence submission and records of personal Hearing:
To abide by the law of natural justice, the assessee were given a chance to be heard in person vide letter dtd.24.07.2018. they were also requested vide said letter to submit documentary evidence in support of their claim, if any, In compliance of the said PH letter.
Shri Milan R. Shah, authorized representative of the applicant appeared for personal hearing on 06.08,2010. During the personal hearing, he submitted that as per their understanding the correct classification of the product appears to be 87169090. However, if in the above Chapter, the product is not classifiable then it may be considered as miscellane
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
overs “Fork-lift trucks; other works trucks fitted with lifting or handling equipment”. It is very clear that major head 8427 covers fork lift trucks or other works trucks fitted with lifting or handling equipment which is different from the product manufactured by the assessee. Therefore, it is concluded that the product i.e. Cargo Trolley used to carry Cargo from one place to another, towable in nature and has solid tyre designed for transportation of baggage and light cargo with a minimum payload. The trolley is rugged and is suitable and treated for outdoor use, does not fall under HSN 84279000 which is specifically classified for other trucks.
4.2 Now we refer to the Chapter Note of Heading 8716 under GST Tariff which reads as under-
8716: Trailers and Semi Trailers; Other Vehicles, Not Mechanically Propelled; Parts Thereof
87161000 : Trailers And Semi Trailers; Other Vehicles, Not Mechanically Propelled; Parts Thereof Trailers And Semi Trailers Of The Caravan Type, For Housing
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ly Propelled; Parts Thereof Other Vehicles Animal Drawn Vehicles
87168090: Trailers And Semi Trailers; Other Vehicles, Not Mechanically Propelled; Parts Thereof Other Vehicles Other
87169010: Trailers And Semi Trailers; Other Vehicles, Not Mechanically Propelled; Parts Thereof: Parts And Accessories of Trailers
87169090: Trailers And Semi Trailers; Other Vehicles, Not Mechanically Propelled; Parts Thereof parts Other
4.2.1 On going through the HSN description of 8716, we find that HSN 8716 covers product Trailers and Semi Trailers; Other Vehicles, Not Mechanically Propelled; Paris thereof whereas the assessee manufacture product Cargo Trolley used to carry Cargo from one place to another, towable in nature and has solid tyre designed for transportation of baggage and light cargo with a minimum payload. The trolley is rugged and is suitable and treated for outdoor use which is nearer to their product Therefore, we jointly take a view that their product i.e. Cargo Trolley used to car
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
arified that the appropriate classification of the item would be under heading 87.16. The CEGAT however has held in this case that the correct classification of Hand Pallet Trucks is under chapter heading 84.27 of CETA, 1985. An appeal against the CEGAT judgement has been filed before Apex Court.
2. In case of a similar product described as Hand Trolley, the CEGAT has held (in the case of Gujrat Industrial Trucks Ltd. Vs. CCE Baroda = 2000 (9) TMI 473 – CEGAT, MUMBAI) that the correct classification of the item is under chapter heading 87.16 of CETA 1985.
3. The matter has been examined by the Board. In view of Ministry's stand to appeal against the CEGAT decision in the case of jaldoot Material Handling Pvt. Ltd., and also the Judgement in the case of Gujrat Industrial Trucks Ltd. Vs. CCE Baroda, it is clarified that the correct classification of the Hand Pallet Trucks/Trolley is under Heading 87.16. However, since in the case of jaldoot Material Handling Pvt. Itd. = 2002 (3) TMI 52
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
tyre designed for transportation of baggage and light cargo with a minimum payload. The trolley is rugged and is suitable and treated for outdoor use is merit classification under major bead 8716.
4.3.2 Now we discuss the product presently classified by the assessor under the HSN 87169090 is correct or otherwise. On going through the major head for HSN 871690 which is specifically cover parts whereas the detail description given under HSN sub heading 87169010 is meant for Parts and accessories of trailers and HSN code 871690920 for other. Here it is worth mention that the eight digit HSN for sub heading 87169090 is also a type of specification for parts only. Hence, it can not be the correct eight digit HSN for the product in question i.e. Cargo Trolley used to carry Cargo from one place to another, towable in nature and has solid tyre designed for transportation of baggage and light cargo with a minimum payload. The trolley is rugged and is suitable and treated for outdoor use.
5.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
b beading under the major head of 6 digit HSN for the product is 87168090 is meant for “Others”. Therefore, we are of the view that the product in question i.e. Cargo Trolley used to carry Cargo from one place to another, towable in nature and has solid tyre designed for transportation of baggage and light cargo with a minimum payload. The trolley is rugged and is suitable and treated for outdoor use is correctly classifiable under HSN 87168090.
6. We note that Harmonized System or Nomenclature (HSN) is internationally recognized product/items coding system which has also been accepted in India. From the above detailed Chapter Sub Heading wise classification of the product in the existing law i.e under Central Excise it is found that the classification of the above said product is one and the same under GST regime as well as under Customs law. No change in the classification under all the entire three “Act” have been noticed. Therefore, find that the product in question i.e. Cargo Tro
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
M/s. KOG-KTV Food Products India P. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Tirunelveli
Central Excise
2018 (9) TMI 1655 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 17-8-2018
Appeal No. E/163/2012 – Final Order No. 42287/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri Hari Radhakrishnan, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture RPD palm oil / palmolein oil and palm fatty acid distillate. They were availing the facility of CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods etc. They availed CENVAT credit of duty paid on inputs li
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ishnan submitted that the appellant had used the impugned steel items for fabrication of storage tanks at site. The storage tanks so manufactured is mentioned as capital goods in definition of CENVAT Credit Rules. Denial of credit on the ground that the impugned storage tanks are embedded to earth after fabrication and has become immovable property is not legally correct. The adjudicating authority has wrongly interpreted the decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2010 (253) ELT 440 (Tri. LB) to deny the credit. He relied upon the decision in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars – 2017 (355) ELT 373 (Mad.) and argued that on identical issue, the jurisdictional High Court has held that credit is eligible
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
M/s Syx Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Mumbai East
Service Tax
2018 (10) TMI 163 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 17-8-2018
ST/86672 & 86680/2018 – A/87200-87201/2018
Service Tax
DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
Shri P.K. Shetty, Advocate for Appellant
Shri O.M. Shivdikar, AC (AR) for Respondent
ORDER
Per: Dr. D.M. Misra
These two appeals are filed against respective Orders-in-Appeal passed by the Principal Additional Director General, DGPM, WRU, Mumbai. Since common issue is involved, I have taken up both the appeals together for disposal.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in providing export of Information Technology Soft
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ld to be inadmissible as credit. Consequently, the refund was also held to be inadmissible.
3. Learned Advocate Shri P.K. Shetty for the appellants submits that the rent was paid by the appellant to the co-owners against the agreement dated 10.10.2012 and the amount to be paid to each of the co-owner has been spelt out in para 28 of the Registered Leave and License agreement. In support, that the rent was paid to each of the co-owners and TDS was deducted, in this regard, relevant TDS certificates have been produced by the appellant. It is his contention that separate invoices are raised by each of the co-owner to the extent of their holding cannot be considered as two invoices raised for the same property in one month.
4. Learned AR for
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
M/s. Manaksia Aluminium Company Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST, Bolpur
Central Excise
2018 (12) TMI 715 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI
CESTAT KOLKATA – AT
Dated:- 17-8-2018
Appeal No. E/76291/2018 – FO/76535/2018
Central Excise
Shri P.K. Choudhary, Member (Judicial)
Shri S.P. Siddhanta, Consultant for the Appellant (s)
Shri S.S. Chattopadhyay, Suptd.(AR) for the Respondent (s)
ORDER
Per Shri P.K. Choudhary
1. The appellant is a small scale manufacturer of Alluminium Ingot, Sheet and Coil classifiable under Chapter 76 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Show Cause Notice was issued on 31.01.2008 alleging short payment of central excise duty of Rs. 75,32,648/- during the period 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ation of Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules. The sale is not to unrelated buyer and hence the situation of revenue neutral is applicable to the facts of the present case. Ld. Consultant further submits that since the appellants have been filing RT-12 Returns on a regular basis, and if the department did not agree to their valuation, they could have issued the show cause notice in time. In this case the show cause notice has been issued beyond the normal period alleging suppression of facts. He relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sundram Fasteners Ltd. vs. Commr. Of Cus. & C.Ex, Hyderabad-I [2009(237) ELT 55(Tri.-Bang.)].
3. Ld. D.R. reiterates the orders of the lower authorities and submits that in various decisions, on the as
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ster units. They have been filing the monthly returns regularly. There is no allegation that returns have not been filed. In fact, during the relevant period, there was no system of filing the pricelists under Rule 173C. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the Commissioner (A)'s finding with regard to suppression of facts is not correct, as the appellants have been filing the RT-12 returns regularly. If the department had not agreed with their valuation, they could have issued the show cause notice in time. In this case, the show cause notice has been issued beyond the normal period alleging suppression of facts. On this ground alone, the entire demand is liable to be set aside. Moreover, we also find great merit in the contenti
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
M/s Visa Resources India Limited Versus Commissioner of CGST & C. Ex., Kolkata North
Service Tax
2018 (12) TMI 861 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI
CESTAT KOLKATA – AT
Dated:- 17-8-2018
Appeal No. ST/75418/2018 – FO/76536/2018
Service Tax
Shri P.K. Choudhary, Member (Judicial)
Shri Nand Kishore Kothari, CA for the Appellant (s)
Shri H.S. Abedin, AC(AR) for the Respondent (s)
ORDER
Per Shri P.K. Choudhary
The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant assessee is engaged in the business of trading of minerals, metals and energy products in India as well as export of such goods. For the purpose of export of goods the appellant has availed various taxable services on payment of Service Tax. Claim for rebate of service tax amounting to Rs. 2,48,482/- paid on the specified taxable services during the period from 06.08.2014 to 30.12.2014 was submitted on 05.08.2015 under Notification No.41/2012-ST dated 29.06.2012. Show Cause Notice dated 10.03.2016 was issued alle
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
aid claimant' declared that no CENVAT credit of service tax paid on the specified service used for export of 'the said goods' has been taken under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004;
III. -that the sale proceeds in respect of the export of 'the said goods' appears to have been realized by or on behalf of 'the said claimant' in India in terms of para 4 of 'the said notification' as evident from Bank Realisation Certificate submitted by the said claimant;
IV. -that 'the said claimant' self declared that they have not taken Electronic Refund from Customs against the Shipping Bills on the specified services used for export of 'the said goods';
V. -that 'the said claimant' submitted the claim papers accompanied by relevant documents and co-relation and nexus between input services and exports made for the said period of claim for refund as well as payment of Service Tax made by them has been established in terms of 'the said notification' read with MoF, DoR (TRU) Circular No.120/01/2010
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
fied in paragraph 2 of the said notification. Therefore, claim amount involving Rs. 1,05,059/- (Rupees One Lakh Five Thousand Fifty Nine) only, as detailed in Table-II Sl.No.1,2 &3 (Col.No.8), is not admissible for refund as it does not fulfill the condition in terms of para 1(c ) of the said notification.
VIII. -that regarding eligibility of the input services provided by M/s. Inspectorate Griffith India Pvt. Ltd. involving Rs. 4,648/- (Rupees Four Thousand Six Hundred Forty Eight) only, as detailed in Table-II Sl.No.4,5,6&7 (Col.No.8), the same were rendered for inspecting 'the said goods', i.e. goods exported being excisable goods well within the place of manufacture – as evident from the inspection certificate. As a result, it does not qualify as 'Specified Services' in terms of Para (a), clause (A)(i) of the said notification. Hence, the said amount, i.e. Rs. 4,648/- is not admissible for refund.
IX. -that an input service invoice of M/s. Bajaj Allianze General Insurance Co.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s (in terms of Notification 41/2012-ST dt. 29.06.2012
Amount involved (Rs.)
Remarks
1.
4181994 Dt.31.07.14
The difference between the amount of claim (as per Para 3) for refund against the shipping bill and the amount of rebate available under the procedure specified in paragraph 2 is less than twenty percent of the rebate available under the procedure specified in paragraph 2 of the notification hence does not confirms to Para 1(c) of the Notification No.41/2012-ST (Supra)
58584
Inadmissible for refund
2.
4322308 dt. 08.08.14
-do-
18935
Inadmissible for refund
3.
4359653 dt. 11.08.14
-do-
27540
Inadmissible for refund
4.
4566202 dt. 23.08.14
The service provided by the input service providers M/s Inspectorate Griffith India Pvt. Ltd. does not fall under 'specified services' as per the Notification No.41/2012-ST(supra) since the service has not been used beyond the place of removal
394
Inadmissible for refund
5.
6788000 dt.22.12.14
The service provided by the i
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ny submits that since the Notification No. 41/2012-ST dated 29.06.2012 is a beneficial legislation, the intent to promote exports by granting exemption of the service tax paid on various services utilized by the exporter during the course of exports of the goods and has to be construed liberally.
4. Ld. D.R. reiterates the orders of the lower authorities.
5. I find that the issue is no more resintegra in view of the various decisions of the Tribunal holding a consistent view. I also find that this Bench in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax-II, Kolkata vs. SSK Exports Ltd. & others in Final Order No.FO/77622-77631/2017 in Appeal Nos. ST/76918, 76926, 76925, 76927, 76922, 76921/16, 76961, 76924, 76919 & 76923/16 wherein under similar circumstances, Revenue has contended that the refund claim for each shipping bill should be examined on individual basis instead of overall basis, has upheld the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) wherein it was held that there is no requirement
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
than twenty per cent of the rebate available under the procedure specified in paragraph 2 in terms of Para 1 (c) of the Notification and accordingly. Accordingly, the refund of service tax of Rs. 1,64,163/- in respect of a few shipping bills under Para 3 is erroneous for the reason indicated above and the same needs to be recovered with interest.
7. The other grounds taken in the appeal are that rebate claim in respect of each shipping bill in an application is a separate claim and the requirement of certificate on the documents enclosed with Form A-1 in terms of clause (h) and clause (i) of Paragraph 3 of the Notification is required to be fulfilled with reference to each shipping bill. It is also contended that in respect of two shipping bills appearing in serial numbers 1 and 2, the rebate claimed against those two shipping bills involving service tax of Rs. 51,167/- is more than 0.50% of the FOB value of the export goods. Therefore, the certificate should have been signed by the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
used for export of goods to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the factory of manufacture in Form A-1;
(d) the exporter who is not so registered under the provisions referred to in clause (c), shall before filing a claim for rebate of service tax, file a declaration in Form A-2, seeking allotment of service tax code, to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the registered office or the head office, as the case may be, of such exporter;
(e) the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, shall, after due verification, allot a service tax code number to the exporter referred to in clause (d), within seven days from the date of receipt of the said Form A-2;
(f) on obtaining the service tax code, exporter referred to in claus
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
l or challan, or any other document for each specified service, in original, issued in the name of the exporter, evidencing payment for the specified service used for export of the said goods and the service tax paid thereon, certified in the manner specified in sub-clauses (A) and (B) :
(A) if the exporter is a proprietorship concern or partnership firm, the documents enclosed with the claim shall be self-certified by the exporter and if the exporter is a limited company, the documents enclosed with the claim shall be certified by the person authorised by the Board of Directors;
(B) the documents enclosed with the claim shall also contain a certificate from the exporter or the person authorised by the Board of Directors, to the effect that specified service to which the document pertains has been received, the service tax payable thereon has been paid and the specified service has been used for export of the said goods under the shipping bill number;
(i) where the total amount o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
of export on the basis of procedure prescribed in paragraph 2; and
(iv) that the rebate claimed is arithmetically accurate,
refund the service tax paid on the specified service within a period of one month from the receipt of said claim :
Provided that where the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, has reason to believe that the claim, or the enclosed documents are not in order or that there is a reason to deny such rebate, he may, after recording the reasons in writing, take action, in accordance with the provisions of the said Act and the rules made thereunder”.
8.1 From the bare reading of the Notification, it is clear that rebate may be claimed on the service tax actually paid on any specified service used for export of goods as per the procedure specified in Paragraph 2 or Paragraph 3 of the said Notification. The plea taken by the Department is that this has to be applied against each individual shippi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
total amount of service tax paid and claimed as rebate have to be furnished. Again, under column “total amount of service tax paid and claimed as rebate” as a percentage of FOB value in shipping bill has to be shown. Therefore, from the Form A-1 and its table it is clear that claim is not shipping bill wise but only details have to be furnished separately for each shipping bill. Nowhere in the Paragraph 3 of the Notification, it is stated that rebate claim has to be filed shipping bill wise. Further, the total amount of service tax paid which is claimed as rebate has to be shown in figure and as a percentage of total FOB value in shipping bill. This also shows that it is not shipping bill specific when more than one shipping bills are involved in a claim. Therefore, there is no requirement to determine FOB value shipping bill wise to determine the formula enumerated in Para 1 (c) or in Para 3 (i) of the notification. Moreover, plain reading of Para 1 in conjunction with Paragraph 3 cl
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Corporate Office Services to Out-of-State Units Are GST Supplies Under CGST Act Section 25(4) and Schedule I Entry 2.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – Supply or not – distinct persons – The activities performed by the employees at the corporate office in the course of or in relation to employment such as accounting, other administrative and IT system maintenance for the units located in the other states as well i.e. distinct persons as per Section 25(4) of the CGST Act shall be treated as su
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Non-Alcoholic Beverage Supplies to SEZ Units via Coffee Machines Not Zero-Rated Under IGST Act Section 16.
Case-Laws
GST
Supplies to SEZ – The supply of non-alcoholic beverages/ingredients to
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
FCM and RCM under GST
Query (Issue) Started By: – Prakriti Mish Dated:- 16-8-2018 Last Reply Date:- 28-8-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 10 Replies
GST
A GTA service provider can opt for RCM in case of FCM anytime ? or there is some requirement by law.
can he change his mechanism anytime ?
Reply By ANITA BHADRA:
The Reply:
In my view , option for RCM / FCM by GTA service provider is transaction based and not for specific period .
No such requirement has been indicated in any notification / provisions under GST Act .
Experts are requested to share their views
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
After browsing so many notifications/circulars/FAQs etc. I am also of the same view.
Reply By Himansu Sekhar:
The Reply:
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
y Prakriti Mish:
The Reply:
From when I can shift to FCM from RCM ? Client has supplied under both mechanism. How to correct his transactions ?
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani:
The Reply:
Logically from the beginning of a month or beginning of a year.
Reply By Ravikumar muthusamy:
The Reply:
If GST collected by GTA in his bill then no need for GST payable by receipient under RCM.
Experts pls correct me if wrong
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
This is an extract from 20th GST Council Meeting on 5.8.17
8.
Goods Transport Agency Service (GTA)
Allowed option of 12% GST with full ITC under forward charge. 5% GST with no ITC will also continue. (However, the GTA has to give an option at the beginning of financial year
Reply By Ganeshan
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Query on GST to Foreign entity at Free Trade Warehosing Zone (SEZ)
Query (Issue) Started By: – Thiruppathi K Dated:- 16-8-2018 Last Reply Date:- 27-8-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Dear Sir,
We are located in Sriperumbudur Free Trade Warehousing Zone as a SEZ Unit. One of the Singapore company is our account holder at our SEZ. We are providing them Warehousing services, Transportation and other services pertaining to warehousing activity, for that we have to ra
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
HDPE Tarpaulins Classified as Laminates; Not Under GST Tariff HSN 6306.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification of goods – Tarpaulins made of HDPE woven fabrics’ are, therefore, laminate of two materi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
TOWARDS LESSER GST RATE SLABS
By: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 16-8-2018
Time and again, there is a demand being raised by GST stakeholders from various quarters on the number of GST rate slabs in India. Under a now 14 months old GST regime in India w.e.f. 1st July, 2017, Goods and Services Tax (GST) is levied and collected under four broad tax rates, viz, 5%, 12%, 18% and 28%. However, there is a upper ceiling of 40% GST rate under the law upto which GST would be levied.
Presently only a handful of nations have 3 or more rates. There are only 5 countries where four or more tax rates are in force. About 50 countries have just one tax rate while about 30 countries have two tax rates.
Apart from these specific tax rates in India, we have zero rated supplies, exempt supplies and supplies with nil rate of GST. In certain cases, there are special rates as in case of textiles, footwear, jewellery etc. To top up the revenue and balance the tax r
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nked to GST rates.
While India is projected to have annual growth rate of 7-8 percent in next few years which is considered to be a fastest in last few years, rationalization of GST rates could benefit industry as well as tax administration, besides reducing possible litigation on rates and classification disputes. The IMF report has fore cast the GDP growth. @ 7.3 percent for financial year 2018-19 and @ 7.5% for financial year 2019-20 taking into account investment and strong private consumption. It states that India is recovering from the after effects of demonetization in November, 2016 and implementation issues in GST. India is also benefiting from good macro and stable economic policies backed by other socio economic reforms in recent past.
International Monetary Fund (IMF) has recently in its annual report expressed that India is on a track to be one of the fastest growing economy in the world and that further rationalization of GST inter alia, would give maximum benefits incl
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
y high number of rates / exemptions which could be simplified without sacrificing progressively of the current GST and with potentially significant gains from lower compliance and administrative costs. Streamlining of exemption would also contribute to progressive tax regime. GST is also expected to increase the amount of economic activity taking place in the formal sector of the economy.
Though GST Council, the apex decision making body for GST is seized of the matter and is authorised to make recommendations in this behalf, following form of rationalization may be looked at:
Present Rate
Proposed Rate
Zero / Nil
Zero / Nil
5%
6%
12%
15%
18%
28%
25%
This may later be further rationalized with zero percent and 25% percent still being on the board. As the countrymen become used to GST, revenues build up, compliances increase and people respecting reasonable profiteering with seamless input tax credit mechanism, India should look at a median rate of 10 to 12 percent by conve
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
CE, CGST, Delhi-III Versus National Informatics Centre Service Inc.
Service Tax
2018 (8) TMI 902 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – 2019 (22) G. S. T. L. 394 (Tri. – Del.)
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 16-8-2018
Appeal No. ST/53521/2015-CU ( DB ) – Final Order No. 52777/2018
Service Tax
HON'BLE SHRI ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And HON'BLE SHRI C.L. MAHAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
For the Appellant : Shri Amresh Jain, DR
For the Respondent : Shri Vibhav Narang, Advocate and Shri A.K. Batra, CA
ORDER
Per Anil Choudhary
This appeal by Revenue is against order-in-original dated 16th June, 2015 passed by the Principal Commissioner Service Tax, Delhi – III Commissionerate, wherein the ld. Commissioner confirmed the demand on outstanding advances along with interest and further proceeded to drop the proposed demand under the head “Erection, commissioning or installation services”.
2. The ld. Commissioner has, for dropping the demand, observed as follows: –
“….The assessee is
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
hereinafter referred as sponsors) whose project is being implemented by the assessee. The payment against these invoices is settled by the assessee from the funds allocated in terms of administrative approval of the Ministry. The assessee charges/retains a definite amount from the allocated funds as his administrative charges as settled between the concerned Ministry and them.”
3. The brief facts are that the respondent, National Informatics Centre Services Inc. (NICSI) is a Government Company incorporated under Section 25 of the Companies Act 1956. They are registered with Service Tax Department under the taxable category of ” Consulting Engineer Services”.
4. NICSI was set up in August, 1995 by National Informatics Centre (NIC) and Department of Electronics & Information Technology (DEIT), Government of India; with the approval of Cabinet. NICSI is established to provide total IT solutions to the Government Organisation. The primary aim of NICSI is to strengthen Government Service
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ugh empanelled vendors, who are empanelled based on Open Tender process, as prescribed in the General Financial Rules of the Government of India. NICSI further provides vairus services like website design & development services, IT support service, etc. Various clients primarily ministries (both state and central) (herein after referred to as “clients”) approaches NICSI in order get their projects executed.
5.1. Work orders undertaken by NICSI can be categorized as under:-
a) Where NICSI is acting as implementing agency;
b) Where NICSI is acting as principal service provider;
c) Where projects involves supply of goods exclusively;
Sample copies of agreements and invoices are enclosed, in appeal paper books.
5.2. Where NICS is acting as implementing agency: In order to understand the flow of transactions, the following chronology is noted-
(i) On receipt of award letter from the clients, assessee examines the kind of services to be provided and accordingly appoint the empanelled
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
vances are only routed through the balance sheet under “other long term liabilities”/”Current Liabilities.”
5.3. Where NICSI acts as Principal Service provider, the service tax liability under “Consultant Engineering Services” is duly discharged. Further, in case of projects involving supply of goods exclusively, there is trading of goods, hence, falls outside the purview of Finance Act, 1994, no service tax liability is attracted.
6. According to Revenue, as proposed in the show cause notice, invoking the extended period of limitation for the period 2008 – 09 to 2012 – 2013, there is wrong classification of services of the activities by the respondent under “Consulting Engineer Services”. The turnkey services, which involves supply and installation of software /hardware with testing and commissioning and on site separate services, hence, are liable to be classified under ECIS. Accordingly as per the Revenue, there is short payment of service tax, as the taxable value, should have in
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
calculated on advance outstanding being Rs. 50.17 crore along with interest on delayed payment of tax Rs. 13.94 crores.
8. The ld. AR for Revenue, Mr. Amresh Jain, reiterating the grounds of appeal stated that the ld. Commissioner has erred in dropping the demand of Rs. 389.02 crores concluding that the activity /service of the respondent was in the nature of “Consulting, Engineering Services” and further, that the respondent was discharging service tax on the amount received as administrative charges from the government/sponsores on agreed rate, for their services. Further, the ld. Commissioner has observed that the respondent identified the vendors and also negotiated the rates etc. by using their technical expertise. The vendors raised their invoice directly in the name of Ministeries of Govt. of India and other autonomous bodies, whose project was being implemented by the respondent. The Adjudicating Authority also erred in observing that the respondent themselves has not executed
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ment in January 2001 with Forster Wheeler Energy Ltd. for project management consultancy in relation to setting up and operating the above LNG terminal. The agreement detailed the various areas in which Forster Wheeler was required to advise and assist in relation to the execution of the project.
10. Whereas in the present case, there are no such agreements. The agreements herein, this case, are between the respondent and the Government Departments / Ministries or other organisations for implementing the entire project on turn-key basis and it was nowhere mentioned that the contract is for providing consultancy in relation to execution of the project by different vendors.
11. Further, from the copies of project/documents, agreements, pro forma invoice, etc., pertaining to some sample projects obtained from the respondent on examination appeared that the respondent was required to undertake the entire range of activities, which, inter alia, comprises of procurement, installation of eq
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
g and implementing the procurement, establishment, engineering commissioning etc. i.e. comprising of all aspects of execution of the project. After receipt of the advance money, the respondent alone is responsible for overall execution of the projects and there seems to be no other agency as an independent entity involved in the execution of the entire project. All agencies involved in execution of any project are only working in the capacity of vendors/subcontractors of NICSI, the respondent. As the project is given to the respondent on turn-key basis, therefore, the gross amount received by the respondent towards execution of the project constitutes the gross taxable value.
13. Further, although the Adjudicating Authority upheld the noticee”s liability of payment of service tax at the time of receipt of advance/receipt of final payment, whichever is earlier, yet he has erred in dropping the complete demand of Rs. 3,89,02,36,342/- , which also included the demand of Rs. 50.17 crore o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
advisory role and has not executed the projects themselves and hence, undoubtedly, are providing “Consulting Engineering Services”.
16. The respondent first provided advance from grant-in aid to undertake the activities assigned under the award/work orders. Such grant-in-aid was given to them by the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, Department of Information Technology, Government of India, National Knowledge Network Division directing the Pay & Accounts Officer, Department of Information Technology to release the funds for the project “action establishment of national knowledge network” to the respondent, to be implemented by NIC, which was the implementing agency. The letter dated 30.03.2010 issued by the Ministry, wherein in para-2, it is stated that sanction of the President of India is hereby conveyed to release the amount of Rs. 240 crore towards grant-in-aid to the respondent, to incur expenditure towards the said project. Further, in para-3, it is stated th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
n of the duration of the project. Further, provided that the respondent will spend the grant-in-aid exclusively in pursuance of the objectives envisaged in rules/memorandum of DIT and for the purpose, it is being sanctioned. Further, provided that grant-in-aid shall be utilised for the purposes for which it has been sanctioned and as per the guidelines are annexed to the Administrative Approval dated 28.01.2009 and respondent and NIC will be liable to refund the unspent balance, if any, to the comment of India. Further, provided that the respondent and NIC will maintain and will present their annual accounts in the standard format as required under GF Rules, 2009.
17. Thus, it is evident that the respondent has acted only as an implementing agency and the disbursed the payments to the vendor's on behalf of Department of Information and Technology, Government of India and others, acted as a pure agent. It is established law that the expenses incurred as a pure agent are not liable
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
in actual execution of the project. The project management functions relating to the project continued to be with Petronet L& G Ltd., which was engaged in the business of setting and operating LNG terminal for receiving storage degasification etc. It was Petronet, which have entered into an EPC contract with the Japanese company to develop, design, engineer and procure equipment, materials and supplies to erect and construct storage tanks of 5 MMTPA capacity with potential to expand. The EPC contract also envisaged other works and involved offshore supply, offshore services, onshore supply, onshore services and construction and erection. Petronet had entered into an agreement with Foster for project management consultancy in relation to setting up and operating the LNG terminal and required to advise and assist in relation to the execution of the project. Foster was in the role of advisers/consultant to petronet so that the work of EPC contractors are as per the requirement and standa
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
de Notice No.53 – CE- ST/97 of the New Delhi Commissionerate dated 4th of July 1997, wherein giving clarification, it is provided “Consulting Engineer” means any professionally qualified engineer or engineering firm, who either directly or indirectly renders any advice consultancy or technical assistance, in any manner, to a client in one or more disciplines of engineering. The taxable service rendered by a Consulting Engineer means any service provided to a client by a Consulting Engineer in relation to advise consultancy or technical assistance, in any manner, in one or more disciplines of engineering.
20. The ld. Counsel also points out that from the copy of pro forma invoice dated 16.02.2002 raised on the Principle – NIC, a Government of India Enterprises, wherein they have given the quotations for various items required for computerization , and the said invoice have shown 7% administrative charges, on the invoice amount. Further, they have paid the service tax on such administra
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s been appointed as the implementing agency on behalf of the Government Department and the money has been received as a trustee. Further, the respondent is liable to account for every single rupee spent for on behalf of the Government. They are not entitled to appropriate a single rupee more than the agreed 7% as agency charge or administrative charges. Further, the activity of the respondent is held to be in the nature of pure agent. As such, no service tax can be demanded on the amount of advance received and /or on the amount spent out of that advance for the purpose of the project. It is also an admitted fact that the respondent has themselves not done any erection, commissioning or installation. Such work has been done by the vendors and/or by agencies appointed by the respondent /assessee. We further find that the assessee/respondent herein has only done the work of advising and assisting the sponsoring agency in selecting various venders, who would supply and /commission various
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Constitution of Standing Committee under sub-rule (4) of rule 97 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 -reg.
03/2018 Dated:- 16-8-2018 CGST – Circulars / Ordes
GST
F.No. CBEC-20/05/01/2018-GST
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs
GST (Policy Wing)
*****
New Delhi, the 16th August, 2018
Order no. 3/2018-Central Tax
Subject: Constitution of Standing Committee under sub-rule (4) of rule 97 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 -reg.
In excise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (4) of rule 97 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 read with Section 168 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 the Government hereby constitutes the r
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ms; = = = = = = = = Plain text (Extract) only = = = = = = = =
e. Secretary/ Joint Secretary/ Economic Advisor, Department of Rural Development;
f. Chief Executive Officer, Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI);
g. Secretary or his nominee not below the rank of Joint Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting;
h. Secretary or his nominee not below the rank of Joint Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of HRD;
i. Director General/ Additional Director General, Bureau of Indian Standard; and
j. The Additional Secretary/ Joint Secretary in charge of Consumer Welfare Fund in the Department of Consumer Affairs, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution who shall also be the Member Secretary of the Committee.
Upender Gupta
Commissioner(GST)
For full text:-Visit the Source
SGST rate on intra-State supply of Handicrafts goods
21/2018 – State Tax(Rate) – S.O. No. 57 Dated:- 16-8-2018 Jharkhand SGST
GST – States
Jharkhand SGST
Jharkhand SGST
COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT
Notification
16th August, 2018
Notification No. -21/2018 – State Tax(Rate)
S.O. No. 57 Dated. 17th August, 2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017), the Government of Jharkhand, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby exempts the intra-state supplies of handicraft goods, the description of which is specified in column (3) of the Table below, falling under the tariff item, sub-heading, heading or Chapter, as specified in the corresponding entry in column (2), from so much state tax leviable thereon under section 9 of the Jharkhand Goods and Service Tax, 2017 (12 of 2017) as is in excess of the rate sp
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ors etc.
6%
5.
4420
Statuettes & other ornaments of wood, wood marquetry & inlaid, jewellery box, wood lathe and lacquer work [including lathe and lacquer work, ambadi sisal craft]
6%
6.
4503 90 90 4504 90
Art ware of cork [including articles of sholapith]
6%
7.
4601 and 4602
Mats, matting and screens of vegetable material, basketwork, wickerwork and other articles of vegetable materials or other plaiting material, articles of loofah (including of bamboo, rattan, canes and other natural fibres, dry flowers (naturally dried), articles thereof, ringal, raambaan article, shola items, Kouna/chumthang (water reeds) crafts, articles of Water hyacinth, korai mat]
2.5%
8.
4823
Articles made of paper mache
2.5%
9.
5607, 5609
Coir articles
2.5 %
10.
56090020, 56090090
Toran, Doorway Decoration made from cotton yarn or woollen yarn and aabhala (mirror) with or without hanging flaps
2.5%
11.
57
Handmade carpets and other handmade textile floor coverings (including namda
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
uding pots, jars, votive, cask, cake cover, tulip bottle, vase
6%
26.
7113 11 10
Silver filigree work
1.5%
27.
7117
Handmade imitation jewellery (including natural seeds, beads jewelry, cardamom garland)
1.5%
28.
7326 90 99
Art ware of iron
6%
29.
7419 99
Art ware of brass, copper/ copper alloys, electro plated with nickel/silver
6%
30.
7616 99 90
Aluminium art ware
6%
31.
8306
Bells, gongs and like, non-electric, of base metal; statuettes, and other ornaments, of base metal; photograph, picture or similar frames, of base metal; mirrors of base metal; (including Bidriware, Panchloga artware, idol, Swamimalai bronze icons, dhokrajaali)
6%
32.
9405 10
Handcrafted lamps (including panchloga lamp)
6%
33.
9401 50, 9403 80
Furniture of bamboo, rattan and cane
6%
34.
9503
Dolls or other toys made of wood or metal or textile material [including wooden toys of sawantwadi, Channapatna toys, Thanjavur doll)
6%
35.
9504
Ganjifa card
6%
36.
9601
Worked ar
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Seventh Amendment) Rules, 2018
G.O.Ms.No. 166 Dated:- 16-8-2018 Telangana SGST
GST – States
Telangana SGST
Telangana SGST
GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA
Revenue (CT-II) Department
G.O.Ms.No. 166
Dated: 16-08-2018
NOTIFICATION
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 164 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No.23 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following Rules further to amend the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:-
1. (1) These Rules may be called the Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Seventh Amendment) Rules, 2018.
(2) They shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from the 12th day of June, 2018.
2. In the Telangana Good
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Selective Minerals & Color Inds. Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai West
Service Tax
2018 (9) TMI 255 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 16-8-2018
APPEAL Nos. ST/86647, 86649/2018 – A/87104-87105/2018
Service Tax
Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial)
Shri R.V. Shetty, Advocate, for appellant
Shri O.M. Shivalikar, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for respondent
ORDER
Heard both sides.
2. These two appeals are filed against respective orders-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Belapur, Mumbai.
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is a merchant exporter and filed refund claims for the period July 2012 to September 2012 and October 2012 to Dec
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
could not be submitted before the authorities below, resulting into rejection of the refunds. He submits that now they are in possession of all the relevant documents by which they could establish that the service tax paid on various services were in fact used in export of the goods. He prays that the matter may be remanded to the adjudicating authority for verification of these documents.
5. Learned AR for the Revenue referring to the impugned order has submitted that since the appellant could not submit relevant documents in support of their claims that the goods were exported and the services on which service tax paid have been used in the export, the claims were accordingly rejected. However, he has no objection in remanding the matter
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Jaspal Singh Versus Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Kharagpur Range, Kharagpur & Ors.
GST
2018 (9) TMI 542 – CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 22 (Cal.)
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 16-8-2018
W. P. No. 15026 (W) of 2018
GST
Debangsu Basak, J.
Mr. Anil Dugar Ms. Rajarshi Chatterje ….. For the Petitioner Mr. Tapan Bhanja
For the Union of India Mr. Abhratosh Majumder Mr. P. Dudhoria Mr. A. Mazumder ….. For the State
A notice dated May 15, 2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Kharagpur Range is under challenge in the present writ petition.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle. The notice for confiscation
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
did not succeed. I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and the materials made available on record.
The owner of a vehicle claims that he did not have notice of the confiscation proceedings in respect of his vehicle. In the facts of the present case, it appears that, the petitioner as the owner was well aware of the confiscation proceedings. At such proceedings, the petitioner did not appear either before the adjudicating authority or the appellate authority or before the Writ Court claiming that, the proceedings stand vitiated by lack of notice to the petitioner. The driver of the vehicle was given notice to the confiscation proceedings. He participated in such confiscation proceedings.
In such circumstances, it cannot b
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Navabharat Ventures Ltd Versus CCT, Visakhapatnam – GST
Service Tax
2018 (9) TMI 831 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI
CESTAT HYDERABAD – AT
Dated:- 16-8-2018
Appeal Nos: E/31216/2017, E/30038-30039/2018 E/30039/2018 – A/31008-31011/2018
Service Tax
Mr. P. Venkata Subba Rao, Member (Technical)
Shri G. Prahlad, Advocate for the Appellant.
Shri Bhanu Kiran, Asst. Commissioner/AR for the Respondent.
ORDER
[Order per: P.V. Subba Rao.]
1. These four appeals have been filed by the appellant against the following impugned orders.
Appeal No.
Impugned Order
E/31216/2017
VIZ-EXCUS-002-APP-044-17-18, dt.21.08.2017 passed by CCCE & ST, Visakhapatnam
E/30038/2018
VIZ-EXCUS-002-APP-75-76-77-17-18, dt.12.01.2017 passed by CCCE & ST, Visakhapatnam
E/30039/2018
-do-
E/30339/2018
VIZ-EXCUS-002-APP-117-17-18, dt.08.02.2018 passed by CCCE & ST, Visakhapatnam
2. Heard both sides and perused the records.
3. The short point to be decided in these appeals is the eligibility o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
appellant submits that there is no doubt that they had availed CENVAT credit on works contract services during the relevant period. However, the exclusion of service on works contract during the relevant period is confined to the services used for the construction of building or civil structure or a part thereof or laying foundation or making structures for support of capital goods. He submitted detailed list of the bills on which they had claimed credit of tax paid on works contract service and argued that while some of these services clearly fall under the scope of the exclusion category, others do not. On a specific query from the Bench, he submits that invoice wise details were not examined either by the original authority or by the first appellate authority in their orders. On perusal of the Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal, I find it so. The learned counsel also contested the show cause notice on the grounds of limitation. It is his contention that they have been regularly
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ontract services during the relevant period and that they were not eligible to avail the credit on works contract if they were used for the two purposes specified in the exclusion part of the definition of input services under Rule 2(l) of the CENAVT Credit Rules, 2004. Learned Counsel also concedes that they had wrongly taken credit but argues that all the invoices on which they have taken credit do not fall under the exclusion category. I find that this is the factual matter to be verified by the original authority and find it a fit case to be remanded back to him for the purpose. These appeals are remanded back to the original authority with a direction to verify with respect to each invoice in dispute whether the works contract involved falls under the category excluded under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and redetermine the demand and penalty accordingly.
7. These appeals are disposed of by way of remand.
(Operative part of this order was pronounced in the open court on
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
