Author: admin_gst

GST – States – 1645/GST-III, 1646/GST-III, 1647/GST-III – Dated:- 25-5-2018 – Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Haryana, Panchkula. Memo No. 1645/GST-III, dated: 25-05-2018 Order Subject: Regarding Guidelines for Refund Processing under the HGST Act -Standard Operating Procedure for manual application and processing. MEMORANDUM Please find enclosed herewith a copy of guidelines regarding refund under HGST Act -Standard Operating Procedure for manual application and processing on the basis of various relevant provisions under HGST Act, Rules, Notifications and Circulars. It is requested to bring this to the knowledge of all the assessing authorities working under your control for their information and necessary action. Endst. No. 1646 GST

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – NO.07/2018 [RC.46/2018/TAXATION/A1 – Dated:- 25-5-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU COMMERCIAL TAXES AND REGISTRATION (B1) DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION NO.07/2018 [RC.46/2018/TAXATION/A1], DATED:25.05.2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by section 48 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TN Act No.19 of 2017) read with sub-rule (3) of rule 83 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, the Commissioner, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby notifies

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – 54/GST-2 – Dated:- 25-5-2018 – HARYANA GOVERNMENT EXCISE AND TAXATION DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION NO.54/GST-2, DATED 25-5-2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (19 of 2017), the Governor of Haryana hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- (1) These rules may be called the Haryana Goods and Services Tax (Sixth Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) They shall be deemed to come into force with effect from the 18th day of April, 2018. 2. In the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter called the said rules), in rule 89, for sub-rule (5), the following shall be substituted, namely:- "(5) In the case of refund on account of inverted duty structure, refund of input tax credit shall be granted as per the following formula:- Maximum Refund Amount = {(Turnover of inverted rated supply of goods and services) × Net ITC÷ Adjusted Tota

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

and Services Tax Act, 2017, shall be deposited in the Fund. (2) Where any amount, having been credited to the Fund, is ordered or directed to be paid to any claimant by the proper officer, appellate authority or court, the same shall be paid from the Fund. (3) Accounts of the Fund maintained by the Government shall be subject to audit by the Principal Accountant General, Haryana. (4) The Government shall, by an order, constitute a Standing Committee (hereinafter referred to as the 'Committee') with a Chairman, a Vice-Chairman, a Member Secretary and such other members as it may deem fit and the Committee shall make recommendations for proper utilisation of the money credited to the Fund for welfare of the consumers. (5) (a) The Committee shall meet as and when necessary, generally four times in a year; (b) the Committee shall meet at such time and place as the Chairman, or in his absence, the Vice-Chairman of the Committee may deem fit; (c) the meeting of the Committee shall be

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

applicant to allow entry and inspection of any premises, from which activities claimed to be for the welfare of consumers are stated to be carried on, to a duly authorised officer of the State Government, as the case may be; (d) to get the accounts of the applicants audited, for ensuring proper utilisation of the grant; (e) to require any applicant, in case of any default, or suppression of material information on his part, to refund in lump-sum alongwith accrued interest, the sanctioned grant to the Committee, and to be subject to prosecution under the Act; (f) to recover any sum due from any applicant in accordance with the provisions of the Act; (g) to require any applicant, or class of applicants to submit a periodical report, indicating proper utilisation of the grant; (h) to reject an application placed before it on account of factual inconsistency, or inaccuracy in material particulars; (i) to recommend minimum financial assistance, by way of grant to an applicant, having regard

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

final adjudication; (d) making available grants for any other purpose recommended by the Central Consumer Protection Council (as may be considered appropriate by the Committee); (e) making available up to 50% of the funds credited to the Fund each year, for publicity/ consumer awareness on GST, provided the availability of funds for consumer welfare activities of the Department of Consumer Affairs is not less than five crore rupees per annum. Explanation.- For the purposes of this rule, (a) 'applicant' means,- (i) the Central Government or State Government; (ii) regulatory authorities or autonomous bodies constituted under an Act of Parliament or Legislature of the State; (iii) any agency or organization engaged in consumer welfare activities for a minimum period of three years, registered under the Companies Act, 2013 (Central Act 18 of 2013) or under any other law for the time being in force; (iv) Gram Panchayat or Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad or Samiti level co-operativ

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

mer Protection Act, 1986 (68 of 1986), for promotion and protection of rights of consumers; (d) 'Committee' means the Committee constituted under sub-rule (4); (e) 'Consumer' has the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (68 of 1986), and includes consumer of goods on which central tax has been paid; (f) 'Fund' means the Consumer Welfare Fund established by the State Government under section 57 of the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (19 of 2017); (g) 'Proper Officer' means the officer having the power under the Act to make an order that the whole or any part of the state tax is refundable.". 4. In the said rules, in FORM GST ITC-03, after entry 5 (e), for the instruction against "**", the following shall be substituted, namely:- The value of capital goods shall be the invoice value reduced by 1/60th per month or part thereof from the date of invoice".

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ted tax Cess 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 (a) Inputs held in stock (where invoice is available) 8 (b) Inputs contained in semi-finished or finished goods held in stock (where invoice is available) 8 (c) Capital goods/plant and machinery held in stock 8 (d) Inputs held in stock or inputs as contained in semi-finished /finished goods held in stock (where invoice is not available) 9. Amount of tax payable and paid (based on Table 8) Sl.No. Description ITC reversible/Tax payable Tax paid along with application for cancellation of registration (GST REG-16) Balance tax payable (3-4) Amount paid through debit to electronic cash ledger Amount paid through debit to electronic credit ledger Central Tax State/ Union territory Tax Integrated Tax Cess 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1. Central Tax 2. State/Union territory Tax 3. Integrated Tax 4. Cess 10. Interest, late fee payable and paid Description Amount payable Amount Paid 1 2 3 (I) Interest on account of (a) Integrated Tax (b) Central Tax (c) State/Uni

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nts need to be taken care of while providing details of stock at Sl. No.8: (i) where the tax invoices related to the inputs held in stock or inputs contained in semi-finished or finished goods held in stock are not available, the registered person shall estimate the amount under sub-rule (3) of rule 44 based on prevailing market price of the goods; (ii) in case of capital goods/ plant and machinery, the value should be the invoice value reduced by 1/60th per month or part thereof from the date of invoice/purchase taking useful life as five years. 4. The details furnished in accordance with sub-rule (3) of rule 44 in the Table at Sl. No. 8 (against entry 8 (d)) shall be duly certified by a practicing chartered accountant or cost accountant. Copy of the certificate shall be uploaded while filing the details. 6. Substitution of FORM GST DRC-07.- For FORM GST DRC-07 of the said rules, the following shall be substituted, namely:- 6. In the said rules, for FORM GST DRC-07, the following form

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

MAHESH, S/O. PADMANABHA PILLAI Versus THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE) STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, KOLLAM, THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, KOLLAM, THE STATE TAX OFFICER 1 CIRCLE, GST COMPLEX, ASRAMAM, KOLLAM, SRI. M.S. VIJAYAKUMAR, VIJAYAKUMAR PROVISION STORES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER PARASSALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 2018 (7) TMI 232 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI – Penalty u/s 67(1)(c)(d) & (i) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 – Held that:- The issue whether the petitioner is liable to penalty under the Act is a matter for the first respondent to consider at the first instance, after considering the objections, if any, raised by the petitioner against the proposal made in Ext. P1

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ngs under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader. 3. The issue whether the petitioner is liable to penalty under the Act is a matter for the first respondent to consider at the first instance, after considering the objections, if any, raised by the petitioner against the proposal made in Ext. P1 notice. In the said view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to raise objections against the proposal made in Ext.P1 notice. Needless to say that if the petitioner raises objection against the proposal made in Ext.P1 notice, orders shall be passed after considering the objections raised by the petitione

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (7) TMI 417 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI – Reversal of CENVAT Credit – inputs and capital goods destroyed by fire – case of appellant is that since the capital goods had been purchased prior to the implementation of the Modvat scheme, i.e. prior to 01.03.1994, no credit of duty was availed at the time of procurement of such capital goods – Held that:- The appellant has relied upon the Block Addition register and Chartered Accountant's certificate which was issued based on the Block Addition register to convince the Bench that the capital goods in question were procured prior to 01.03.1994 – the contention of the appellant cannot be accepted based on this evidence alone, and that the appellant has failed to produce any further evidence in this regard.
–
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Auto Ignition Ltd. [2008 (4) TMI 43 – SUPREME COURT] has held that the onus of proof of availment of credit by the assessee is on the Revenue – With regard to the ratio of this judgment, the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

On 26.10.2005, the appellant informed the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner and Superintendent of Central Excise of the incident. The appellant reversed Cenvat credit amounting to ₹ 33,86,947/- which was duly intimated to the department. The office of the Accountant General (CW & RA), Odisha conducted an audit during which a spot memo was issued to the appellant seeking details of the insurance claim amounting to ₹ 8,68,84,916/- received by the appellant in respect of raw material and spares lost in the fire. Consequently, post completion of the audit, a show cause notice dated 22.12.2008 was issued to the appellant proposing recovery of credit of ₹ 36,35,722/- under Rule 14 of the Cenvat credit Rules, along with interest and penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the aversions made in the show cause notice and imposed penalty of equal amount of duty. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide stay order dated 07.10.2010 directed the appellant to deposi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d that since the Cenvat credit on the raw material had been availed at the time of procurement, which due to the fire had been destructed beyond repair, the appellant reversed Cenvat credit amounting to ₹ 33,86,947/- on 10.11.2005. He also stated that since the capital goods had been purchased prior to the implementation of the Modvat scheme, i.e. prior to 01.03.1994, no credit of duty was availed at the time of procurement of such capital goods. Therefore, the appellant was not liable to reverse any further credit. He further submitted that the department had erred while calculating the amount of short-reversal of credit as they had failed to consider the reversal of the cess amount of ₹ 66,411/-. He relied upon the following cases: 1. Commr. Of Customs v. Auto Ignition Ltd. [2008 (226) ELT 14 (SC)] 2. Commr. V. Indchem Electronics [2003 (157) ELT A206 (SC)] 3. Grasim Industries v. Commr. Of Central Excise, Indore [2007 (208) ELT 336 (Tri.-LB)] 5. The ld. A.R. for the Reve

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – EXN-F(10)-14/2018-22/2018-State Tax – Dated:- 25-5-2018 – Government of Himachal Pradesh Excise and Taxation Department No. EXN-F(10)-14/2018 Dated: Shimla-2 25th May, 2018 Notification No.22/2018-State Tax In exercise of the powers conferred by section 128 of the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (10 of 2017), the Governor of Himachal Pradesh, on the recommendations of the Council, is pleased to waive the late fee payable under section 47 of the said Act for fail

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (9) TMI 478 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 517 (A. A. R. – GST) – Maintainability of application for Advance Ruling – Section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – issue of classification of the subject goods.
–
Held that:- The application has been made with reference to classification dispute in respect of the subject goods and the similar issue of applicant is a matter of dispute in the various forums of the department under the earlier Central Excise and Customs regime as per details given by the jurisdictional officer in his submissions – the applicant himself, also, during the course of hearing before this authority has admitted and confirmed that their import consignments are being provisionally assessed under the Customs Act after coming into effect of GST for classification of subject goods which is the same issue that has been raised by them in this application before us.
–
In view of admission by the applicant

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

NDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions connected to the issues mentioned in para 02 below : Q. 1. Whether the subject goods proposed to be supplied by the applicant merits classification under the Heading 2309, (Sr. No. 102) in terms of Notification No. 2/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and is therefore exempt from the levy of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act)? Q. 2. Whether the subject goods proposed to be supplied by the applicant merits classification under the Heading 2309, (Sr. No. 102) in terms of Notification No. 2/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and is therefore exempt from the levy of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (IGST Act)? Q. 3. Whether the subject goods proposed to be supplied by the applicant merits classification under the Heading 2309, (Sr. No. 102) in terms o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

PER THE APPLICANT The applicant has submitted as follows: The applicant, registered in terms of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, imports BIOFOS Monocalcium Phosphate (hereinafter referred to as the subject goods from USA and sells it to whole sellers or manufacturers of animal feed. The subject goods are used as an animal/poultry feed supplement/additive that is added to an animal/poultry feed to enhance its nutritional value, They have submitted that the subject feed acts as a source of phosphorus and calcium and fluorine that helps meet animal/poultry requirements for these essential nutrients. The applicant, on the basis of their submissions made in Annexure Il to their application dated 22.02.2018, have arrived at a conclusion that the subject goods would be covered under the Heading 2309 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (CTA). The applicant has further submitted that, being a poultry feed and the fact of being covered under Heading 2309, the subjec

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

oduct Biofos (Mono Calcium Phosphate) was imported under Customs Tariff Heading No. 28352610 and the same goods were classified by the applicant under Customs Tariff Heading No.2309 by way of distributing to their customers ; the Board while issuing exemption notification under Section 11C vide No. 4/2016- C.E. (N.T) dt. 12.02.2016 had classified Di-calcium Phosphate (animal feed grade) under Chapter Heading No. 2835 ; Further, exemption Notification No. 03/2014 CE, dtd 3-2-2014 has been issued for the subsequent period allowing exemption to Di-calcium Phosphate classified under Chapter 28 and thus as per Board's notifications, mono calcium phosphate would also be classifiable under Chapter Heading No. 28 of the CETA, 1985. In view of the above. it is clear that the product Calcium Phosphate is classifiable under Chapter Heading 28.35 of the Central Excise Tariff and not under Chapter [leading No. 23.09 of the Central Excise Tariff as claimed by the applicant and has therefore beco

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

o confirmed that proceedings under Central Excise Act were there but the same would not debar them from ARA. The applicant further confirmed that their import consignments were being provisionally assessed under the Customs Act, after coming into effect of GST, for the issue of classification of the subject goods, which is also the issue in the subject application. 05. OBSERVATIONS We have gone through the facts of the case and the submissions made by both, the applicant and the department. We find that the application has been made with reference to classification dispute in respect of the subject goods and the similar issue of applicant is a matter of dispute in the various forums of the department under the earlier Central Excise and Customs regime as per details given by the jurisdictional officer in his submissions. Further we find that the applicant himself, also, during the course of hearing before this authority has admitted and confirmed that their import consignments are bein

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

application is already pending or decided in any proceedings in the case of an applicant under any of the provisions of this Act: Provided further that no application shall be rejected under this sub-section unless an opportunity of hearing has been given to the applicant: Provided also that where the application is rejected, the reasons for such rejection shall be specified in the order. In view of admission by the applicant at the time of Personal Hearing that in the present GST regime also, their import consignments have been provisionally assessed for classification and accordingly, applicability Of Customs duty and IGST on the same, their application is liable for rejection as per proviso to section 98 (2) of the CGST Act referred above and therefore cannot be entertained by this authority and is accordingly rejected. ORDER (under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) NO.GST-ARA-32/2017-18/B-40 Mumbai, dt.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – 458/2018/5(120)/XXVII(8)/2018/CT-22 – Dated:- 25-5-2018 – Commissioner State Tax Uttarakhand (State Tax Department) No : 458/2018/5(120)/XXVII(8)/2018/CT-22 Dehradun : : Dated 25th May, 2018 Notification WHEREAS, the State Government is satisfied that it is expedient so to do in public interest; Now, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 128 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (06 of 2017), the Governor, on the recommendations of the Council, i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 306 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING – UTTAR PRADESH – 2018 (17) G. S. T. L. 35 (A. A. R. – GST) – Classification of goods – Waste/by-product – Mahua De-oiled cake – input credit – Whether Mahua De-oiled cake (De-oiled Rice Bran being used as an ingredient of Cattle Feed, Poultry Feed and other animal feeds and is 'Waste generated' during the solvent extraction process? – Whether the applicant is eligible to get entire tax input credit of GST paid on purchase of Mahua Oil Cake/ Rice Bran Oil cake used in the manufacture of solvent extracted oil?
–
Held that:- When common inputs are being used for both taxable and exempted supplies, the party is required to reverse the credit proportional to the amount of credit pertaining to the exempted supplies. ITC can be availed only on goods and services for business purposes. If they are used for non-business (personal) purposes, or for making exempt supplies ITC cannot be claimed.
–
From Classification of various goods it ca

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

used in the manufacture of solvent extracted oil is partially allowed as per process/ formula prescribed in the Chapter V (INPUT TAX CREDIT) of GST Rules, 2017, because, the applicant manufacturing both taxable and exempted goods by using raw materials viz Mahua De-oiled cake and De-oiled Rice Bran. Further, if common inputs are used for both taxable and exempted supplies, the applicant is required to reverse the credit proportional to the amount of credit pertaining to the exempted supplies immediately. – Order No. 6 Dated:- 25-5-2018 – Shri Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Member (State Tax) and Dinesh Kumar, Member (Central Tax) ORDER M/s Indo Prosoya Foods (P) Ltd., 54/10, Naya Ganj, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh – 208001 ((hereinafter called the applicant) is a registered assessee under GST Having GSTN : 09AAACI8129B1ZS. 2. The applicant is engaged in the business of purchases of Mahua oil cake/Rice Bran for extraction of oil through solvent extraction process. 3. Initially the applicant has submit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

wanshree Agrawal and Shri Vaibhav Dixit, Advocates appeared on behalf of the applicant. In the written submission, the applicant has submitted that -  a. They purchases Mahua oil cake/ Rice Bran for extraction of oil through solvent extraction process in which oil is the primary product and De-oiled Mahua Cake/ De-oiled Rice Bran is obtained as by-product. The raw material used by the applicant are classified under the following HSN Code :- Oil seed – 1207 Oil Cake – 2306 Rice Bran – 2302. b. After processing, product manufactured by using the above said raw material is solvent extracted oil, which is classified under HSN 1515. c. The solvent extracted oil is obtained after palletisation and various other processes. Mahua oil cake/Rice Bran is fed to solvent extraction plant for extraction of oil through Hexane. d. Hexane goes to solvent recovery system balance. De-oiled Mahua Cake/ De-oiled Rice Bran is obtained as a by-product, which are wholly used as ingredient of fish meal/ c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ojoba oil) and their fractions……….." And heading 1515 90 40 reads as under – "Fixed vegetable oils of edible grade namely the following: mango kernel oil, mahua oil, rice bran oil ……. other". Further, towards the Heading 1522, which is residue resulting from treatment of fatty substances in respect of goods of the same chapter. 8. In reference to Input [Tax] Credit (ITC) of GST paid on goods/services, Section 17(2) CGST Act, 2017 is reproduced below – '"Where the goods or services or both are used by the registered person partly for effecting taxable supplies including zero-rated supplies under this Act or under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act and partly for effecting exempt supplies under the said Acts, the amount of credit shall be restricted to so much of the input tax as is attributable to the said taxable supplies including zero-rated supplies".  That means when common inputs are being used for both taxable and exempt

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ste its usage in cattle feeding and fish feeding are usual in practice. De-oiled rice bran has been seen in its usage in largely cattle feed, poultry and fish feed. 11. As per Notification No. 2/2017-CentraI Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017 Sl. No. Chapter/ Heading/ Sub-heading/ Tariff item Description of Goods 102. 2302, 2304, 2305, 2306, 2308, 2309 Aquatic feed including shrimp feed and prawn feed, poultry feed & cattle feed, including grass, hay & straw, supplement & husk of pulses, concentrates & additives, wheat bran & de-oiled cake 12. The above notification has been amended vide Notification 7/2018- Central Tax (Rate), dated 25-1-2018 inserting an Entry 102A, which reads as under – In the said notification, (1) in the Schedule, (i) in S. No. 102, for the entry in column (3), the entry "Aquatic feed including shrimp feed & prawn feed, poultry feed & cattle feed, including grass, hay & straw, supplement & husk of pulses, concentrates & addit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e in cattle feeding and fish feeding are usual in practice. De-oiled rice bran has been seen in its usage in largely cattle feed, poultry and fish feed are usual in practice. So far that purpose it can be classifiable in 2309 and De-oiled rice bran has been seen in its usage in largely cattle feed, poultry and fish feed and it appears as classifiable in Chapter 2308. The input credit of GST paid on raw materials is not allowable in the present case since; the party is manufacturing taxable as well as exempt supply. " 15. In view of the above, we rule as under : RULING 16. The point-wise clarifications are as under :- (a) Whether Mahua De-oiled cake/ De-oiled Rice Bran being used as an ingredient of Cattle Feed, Poultry Feed and other animal feeds and is 'Waste generated' during the solvent extraction process? Ans. – Mahua De-oiled cake/De-oiIed Rice Bran is a by-product occurred during the solvent extraction process, which is used as an ingredient of Cattle Feed, Poultry F

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – bk r – Dated:- 24-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 4-9-2018 – We are service provider and engaged in exporting our entire services and claim refund regularly quarterly for cenvat credit availed in respect of inputs service used for providing output service under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules read with notification No. 27/2012 CEx and department was providing service tax refund. But after GST we submitted the refund claim for the Q.E.12/2016 on 25/09/2017, for Q.E 03/2017 on 26/12/2017 and for Q.E. 06/2017 on 27/03/2018. All claims were filed after GST implementation i.e. after 01/07/2017. We were having Cenvat Credit Balance of ₹ 92 lacs as on 30.06.2017 and the same was also shown in ST 3 return for the period of April 2017 to June 2017 as a closing balance. but this amount was not carried forward by us in the GST under Trans-1 or other wise. We took opening balance of ITC zero as on 01.07.2017 and no ITC claimed in respect of balance Cenvat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ation. and the cenvat credit lying as on 01/07/2017 get lapsed. The Department also asked for the copy of return whereunder it has been shown that the amount claimed as refund has been reversed but after GST we filed GSTR-3B /GSTR-1 and in this returns no debit entry made as the cenvat credit balance as on 30/06/2017 was not carried forward in ITC of GST. We also cannot file any return under Service Tax. What we can do now. whether the department contention is right? and they reject my refund claim on these grounds. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = The department is absolutely right in this approach. You have committed Himalayan blunder by not carrying forward the balance in TRANS-1. The department extended the date for filing TRANS -1 in the interest of asseessees. Now you are on a warm wicket legally. But there is still hope for you. You should apply for refund and let the department reject it. You can get relief only through litigation only. Try your luck. Must fight. Path is

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

inted day i.e. 1st July, 2017. Such proceedings may pertain to refund claims of CENVAT credit/VAT or export related rebate or service tax, such proceedings may either result in recovery of tax or refund. All such cases would be disposed of under the existing law. If any claim for refund of CENVAT credit is fully or partially rejected, the amount so rejected shall lapse. Refund of CENVAT credit shall be paid in cash. There will be no refund of CENVAT if already carry forwarded. If any amount becomes recoverable, the same shall be recovered as arrear of tax under GST Act. Statutory provisions relating to transition are contained in chapter XX (section 139 to 142) of the CGST Act, 2017, SGST Act(s), 2017 and Rule 117 to 121 of the CGST Rules, 2017 . Based on above, the intention of the government is clear that right of the tax payer is not deprived. If one was not able to carry forward the credit, does not mean that credit may lapse. Please also note that credit will lapse only when it is

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

efund claim under Section11 B (2) (d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944? Thanks. – Reply By bk r – The Reply = Sir I filed the refund under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit rules 2004 alongwith Notification No. 27/2012 CE (NT) dated 18.06.2012. Thanks sir – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, Under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, you are required to reverse the Cenvat credit. This is the reason department is insisting for the same. In the whole scenario, my suggestion is that, withdraw you claim and again filed the refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, with proper grounds, if SCN has not been issued. Here, please note that Central Excise Act, 1944 has been repealed, but saved otherwise and also mentioned in Circulars is Section11B(2) of the said Act. Our experts may correct me if mistaken. Thanks – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Cenvat Credit Rules and Central Excise Rules are not independent of Central Excise Act. Any refund or rebate filed under Central Exci

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

judgment on this matter now. – Reply By Ankur Jain – The Reply = This issue has created an analogy, the return for the period April-June 2017 was filed in August and by that time no refund application was filed. The refund claims were filed in the month of September and just by not carrying forward the refund amount in Tran-1, the Cenvat Credit shall deemed to be reversed as it has happened in one of our very own case. It was not a mandate to reverse the Credit claimed in the last return filed during the existing law but it was certainly a mandate that Cenvat Credit of refund claimed must not be transitioned in GST regime (which you have correctly done in present case). There is no infirmity as per the law in your refund claims and that must be allowed. In case the Adjudicating authority rejects the refund claim with lack of understanding of laws, I am very much sure that the refund shall be granted during the appellate proceedings. – Reply By BalKrishan Rakheja – The Reply = Thanks f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

o. please clarify. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = The department is right but you will get relief only through appellate channel. No Govt. Officer would take risk. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir,Have you received any Notice for rejecting the claim? If so, please mention full grounds for which rejection is purposed.Thanks – Reply By bk r – The Reply = Sir I have not received the SCN yet but I read out the draft SCN put up to the higher authorities by the technical wing and as I memories the issue is taken on the following groind. 1. That the notice was not eligible to retain cenvat credit lying balance as on 30.06.2017 under cenvat credit rules 2004, as there is no provisions under GST Law regarding retaining of Cenvat credit balance lying as on 30.06.2017 2. That as per Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2017 notified after supersession of Cenvat Credit rules 2004 the assess was required to transfer his entire cenvat credit to the Electronic credit ledger, but in this

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

. Please guide whether the department contention is right. Is there any another way to avoid SCN as my huge amount will be blocked. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, There is no way to avoid SCN. the only way out is to contest the SCN. Please wait till SCN is issued finally, because proposition and supposition may not help any way.Thanks – Reply By ROSHAN PRADHAN – The Reply = GST law allows Refund claim filed in respect of Cenvat Credit even after 1st July 2017 (appointed date), the same has to be disposed under existing law. Since law allows to process refund of cenvat credit under existing law, the requirement of transfer of credit to GST does not arise. If cenvat credit in respect of ₹ 92 lakhs meets the basic condition of claiming cevnat credit, there should be any problem ( Input suppliers payment to be made within the allowed time period ) and refund claim filed should be within time limit of 1 years Department is contending with procedural issues arising for main

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, duty, tax, interest or any other amount paid under the existing law, shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of existing law and any amount eventually accruing to him shall be paid in cash, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained under the provisions of existing law other than the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) : If such claim for Cenvat Credit is fully or partially rejected – Amount so rejected shall lapse Provided that where any claim for refund of CENVAT credit is fully or partially rejected, the amount so rejected shall lapse : No refund of Cenvat if the same is carried forward as ITC under GST Act Provided further that no refund shall be allowed of any amount of CENVAT credit where the balance of the said amount as on the appointed day has been carried forward under this Act. Refund claimed filed after the appointed date for refund of any duty/tax paid in respect of goods or services exported und

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – sanjeev batra – Dated:- 24-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 24-5-2018 – 1) What will be the place of supply if estate agent receive commission from abroad for letting out/sale of property in india ? 2) What will be tax if property is located in different State other than estate agent registered premises ? 3) What will be tax if property is located in same State of registered premises of estate agent ? – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, With regards, to your query No.1, the Section 13(4) of IGST Act, 2017, which is applicable in your case and is as under :- 13 (4) The place of supply of services supplied directly in relation to an immovable property, including services supplied in this regard by exper

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he amount of commission received by the estate agent from abroad is exigible to tax. Further, in view of section 7(3) and 8(2) of IGST Act, 2017, inter-state or intra-state supply shall be determined in the following manner:- (a) Where location of supplier and place of supply are in two different States, the same shall be considered as inter-state supply and (b) Where location of supplier and the place of supply are in the same State, the same shall be treated as intra-State supply. Accordingly IGST or CGST/SGST shall be charged in your case. Hope, this will resolve your query. Regards Nitika Aggarwal 9953157961 – Reply By YAGAY and SUN – The Reply = Immovable property related services including hotel accommodation,Location at which the imm

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Archna Gupta – Dated:- 24-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 26-5-2018 – Dear Experts Please reply to following queries: 1. Please clarify whether GST audit under section 35(5) is to be done registration wise or PAN no. wise. 2. Are forms GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C available? – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Madam,In my point of view your query may be taken up with GST via twitter for early and reliable reply.Thanks – Reply By YAGAY and SUN – The Reply = 1) It will depend i.e. Section says Turnover but Rules says Aggregate Turnover. However in our view it is Registration wise.2) Currently both Forms are not available. May be make available by next month. – Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN – The Reply = We have

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 24-5-2018 – Central Tax, GST Delhi East Commissionerate arrested a Shahdara based father son-duo on 22.05.2018 in case of fraudulent issuance of Input Tax Credit invoices involving evasion of approximately ₹ 28 Crores relating to Copper industry. It is the first case of arrest in Delhi, under the new tax regime that came into force on 1st July, 2017. Searches were conducted at several places during which various incriminating documents and evidence w

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Shubham Dua – Dated:- 24-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 25-5-2018 – Dear Expert(s), A Group Insurance taken by the Company of all their workers AND ALSO RECOVERED THE COST OF SUCH EXPENSE FROM THEIR WORKERS. The bill is in the name of the company, so whether the GST Input allowed to the company as it is written in the LAW:No Input shall be allowed for rent-a-cab, health insurance and life insurance except the following: Government makes it obligatory for employers to provide it to its employees (Workmen Compensation Act.) – Reply By Nitika Aggarwal – The Reply = Dear Sir, Input tax credit of GST charged on health insurance has been specifically barred in the law via section 17(5)(b)(iii) of CGST Act, 2017

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ds Nitika Aggarwal 9953157961 – Reply By Shubham Dua – The Reply = Dear Mam, Thanks for your valuable reply and concern.But as per the fact of the case, we are under obligation to comply with the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and accordingly taking the group insurance of all the workers.The point is we are deducting the amount of such claim from their wages and salaries of our workers. Now is the input of GST allowed to us we are debited the expense on one side and made the recovery on the other side.- Best Regards,Shubham DuaCell: +91-8826406987 +91-9958033578 – Reply By YAGAY and SUN – The Reply = .There is specific denial in the GST Law about availment of ITC on such services. However, you may get it clarified from the Department

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – JAY SHAH – Dated:- 24-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 25-5-2018 – Dear SirsWe are SEZ units and having warehouse in SEZ Area. we have store the cargo of one of our client who is outside india. This cargo is imported into india and will be handed over to CHA. Invoicing and receipt of the same are in foreign currency. is warehousing service taxable or to be considered as a export/zero rated? – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Exemption to goods imported by unit/developer in Special Economic Zone (SEZ) for authorised operations In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

me importer is in gujarat.Morever this time warehousing charges will be paid by exporter who is outsie india. Invoice will be made in $. And will recived the sane.What is implication of gst in both case. If paid by importer in india or paid by exporter who are outside india. Kindly note We are SEZ units. – Reply By Nitika Aggarwal – The Reply = Dear Sir, As per the facts briefed to us, the warehousing services provided by SEZ units to the importers located in India are exigible to tax in terms of section 7(5)(b) of IGST Act, 2017. Relevant extract of the same is reproduced as under:- (5) Supply of goods or services or both,- (a) when the supplier is located in India and the place of supply is outside India; (b) to or by a Special Economic Z

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Aggarwal – The Reply = Sir, What matters in the transaction is to whom the services has been provided. As per the facts briefed, since services has been provided to the person located in India i.e. Importer, This means Location of supplier is in India Location of recipient is in India Place of supply of aforesaid services is in India. Thus, the aforesaid transaction is taxable in accordance with the provisions of IGST Act, 2017. So far as transaction is taxable, receiving of consideration either in INR or foreign exchange is immaterial and inconsequential. In any case it shall not be treated as export, as for the purpose of export, it conditions needs to be satisfied, which is not satisfied in your case. Regards Nitika Aggarwal 9953157961

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – By: – CA Akash Phophalia – Dated:- 24-5-2018 – (1) Introduction: Businesses run on core competencies. It is the fundamental principle of management that business must run efficiently. The specialization and efficiency has resulted in increase in job work for manufacturers. In this article we will deal with the situation of admissibility of input tax credit on inputs sent to a job worker. (2) Meaning of relevant terms: Job work – Section2(68) of CGST Act 2017 defines the term as – job-work means any treatment or process undertaken by a person on goods belonging to another registered person and the expression job worker shall be construed accordingly. Thus where any person performs any process or treatment on good belonging to the other person then such first mentioned person shall be called as job worker and the treatment or process so undertaken is construed as job-work. Principal- The term principal is not directly defined under the law. However, it sim

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

principal, without being physically received by the principal at its place of business, then also it shall be presumed that the goods are received by the principal and the input tax credit shall be admissible. Further, it is essential to note that where the inputs sent for job-work are not received back by the principal after completion of job-work or otherwise or are not supplied from the place of business of the job worker within one year of being sent out, it shall be deemed that such inputs had been supplied by the principal to the job-worker on the day when the said inputs were sent out and the tax liability shall accrue from such date. However, the period of one year in case where the inputs are sent directly to a job-worker, the period of one year shall be counted from the date of receipts of inputs by the job-worker. (4) Whether credit is admissible on capital goods sent to job-worker: The conditions regarding availment of input tax credit on capital goods are similar to the c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rvice Tax Identification Number or Unique Identity Number of the consignee, if registered; (iv) Harmonised System of Nomenclature code and description of goods; (v) Quantity(provisional, where the exact quantity being supplied is not known); (vi) taxable value; (vii) tax rate and tax amount-central tax, State tax, integrated tax, Union Territory tax or cess, where the transportation is for supply to the consignee; (viii) place of supply, in case of inter State movement; and (ix) signature (c) The details of challan in respect of goods dispatched to a job worker or received from a job worker or sent from one job worker to another during a quarter shall be included in FORM GST ITC-04 furnished for the period on or before the twenty-fifth day of the month succeeding the said quarter. (d) Where the inputs or capital goods are not returned to the principal within the time stipulated, it shall be deemed that such inputs or capital goods had been supplied by the principal to the job-worker on

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (5) TMI 1514 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – CENVAT credit – input services – denial on account of nexus – Held that: – there is no clarity as to whether what was sent through courier were only samplers or the manufactured goods under the guise of samples; and in any case, if the dispatch was of the goods then, it will have a different consequence – there is no clarity as to whether what was sent through courier were only samplers or the manufactured goods under the guise of samples; and in any case, if the dispatch was of the goods then, it will have a different consequence – it is proper to remit this issue back to the file of the adjudicating authority with a further direction to the appellant to clarify its stand ie., what was sent was courier were samples or manufactured goods and then it is for the adjudicating authority to give a finding after considering the same in accordance with law – appeal allowed by way of remand. – E/40019/2018 – Final Order No. 41554/2018 – Dated:- 24-5-

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

– being the service tax credit taken on the above mentioned services which are ineligible input services as detailed above should not be recovered under Rule 14 of CCR,2004, read with Section 11A (1) of CEA, 1944; ii) interest at the prescribed rate should not be charged from them under Rule 14 of CCR, 2004, read with Section 11AA of the CEA, 1944; and iii) penalty should not be imposed under Rule 15 (1) of CCR, 2004. 3. The appellant-assessee filed a detailed reply vide its letter dated nil and also explained that they have correctly availed the input credit. The adjudicating authority however, vide Order-in-Original dated 26.08.2016 passed an order allowing a partial Cenvat credit. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals-I), Chennai, and the Commissioner (Appeals) also gave a partial relief vide his OIA dated 28.11.2016. Aggrieved by the said order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee is now before this Tribunal and the as

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the impugned order had not discharged its onus as to ineligibility of credit regarding the service of which Cenvat credit was denied. Thus, according to the ld. Counsel for the appellant the courier service on outward transportation of goods utilized by the manufacturer for transportation of goods are certainly covered under Rule 2 (l) of CCR, 2004 and that when the goods were being dispatched through courier, the ownership of the goods are not transferred till they are delivered to the customers through courier agency and therefore, service tax paid up that point was required to be considered for the purpose of Cenvat credit. In this regard, the Ld. Consultant has relied on the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCE & ST, Belgaum Vs. Vasavadatta Cements Ltd. – 2011 (24) STR 542 (Kar.). The Ld. Consultant finally submits inter-alia that the Cenvat credit is available up to the place of removal which has been defined under Section 4 (3) (c) of CEA, 1944;

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ite clear from the appellant s grounds of appeal No.8, 10, 14 & 18. Thus there is no clarity as to whether what was sent through courier were only samplers or the manufactured goods under the guise of samples; and in any case, if the dispatch was of the goods then, it will have a different consequence. Once this factual aspect becomes clear, then the law as laid down by the Courts can be applied. I therefore deem it proper to remit this issue back to the file of the adjudicating authority with a further direction to the appellant to clarify its stand ie., what was sent was courier were samples or manufactured goods and then it is for the adjudicating authority to give a finding after considering the same in accordance with law. 6.2 The Ld. Consultant appearing for the appellant further argued that with regard to ISD credit, the authorities should not question the liability of credit. The Ld. Commissioner appearing for the Revenue argued that the Commissioner (Appeals) has only dire

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (5) TMI 1703 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (14) G. S. T. L. 166 (All.) – Release of seized goods – books of account not produced – order passed under Section 67(6) of the GST Act, 2017 – principles of Natural Justice – as submitted that the books of account were produced along with the reply submitted by the petitioner on 25.02.2018 and without taking into account, on surmises and conjuncture, the impugned order dated 04.05.2018 was passed – Held that:- Prima facie, issue requires scrutiny – the respondent-authorities are directed to release the goods which were seized on 25.04.2018 subject to deposit of ₹ 3 lakh being made by the petitioner and for the balance amount adequate security may be provided other than cash or bank gua

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

,53,223/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the books of account could not be produced at the time of search on account of the fact that the accountant who is the custodian of the said books was not present and could not be contacted. It is further submitted that the books of account were produced along with the reply submitted by the petitioner on 25.02.2018 and without taking into account, on surmises and conjuncture, the impugned order dated 04.05.2018 was passed under Section 67(6) of the GST Act, 2017. It is also submitted that once the books of account were produced, it was imperative upon the authority to consider the same and ought to have verified with the actual stock but without carrying on the said exercise, the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. MANJUNATHAA ROCK DRILLS AND T. MURUGESH, PROPRIETOR, ASIAN AGENCIES Versus ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KALPATTA, THE COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, STATE OF KERALA, TAXES (B) DEPARTMENT, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT AND GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS – 2018 (5) TMI 1736 – KERALA HIGH COURT – [2018] 2 GSTL 125 (Ker) – Release of detained goods – inaction on the part of the second respondent in completing the adjudication provided for under Section 129 of Kerala SGST Act in respect of the goods detained – Held that:- It is appropriate to dispo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ued Ext.P5(a) notice calling upon him to show cause why Integrated Goods and Service Tax and penalty as indicated therein shall not be paid in respect of the detained goods. Exts.P6 and P6(a) are the objections preferred by the petitioners to P5(a) notice. The grievance of the petitioners in the writ petition concerns the inaction on the part of the second respondent in completing the adjudication provided for under Section 129 of the Act in respect of the goods detained. The petitioners, therefore, seek appropriate directions in this regard in the writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned Government Pleader. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as also the provisions contained i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (6) TMI 1300 – CESTAT CHANDIGARH – TMI – 100% EOU – Refund of Interest made on the pre-deposit – Section 35FF of CEA – pre-deposit of ₹ 32,62,000/- was made on 9.2.2016 – Held that:- Pre-deposit of ₹ 32,62,000/- does not pertain to the appeal of 2014. Other set of appeals in the above mentioned Final order pertain to the period after 6.8.2014 for which the appellant claim to have made pre-deposit and have stated so in their refund application. This aspect has been completely ignored by the adjudicating authority as well as first appellate authority for the purpose of refund of interest – The finding given by the first appellate authority on pre-deposit pertaining to period before the Finance Act 2014 therefore appears to be clearly erroneous.
–
The matter is therefore remanded back to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the claim of interest of the appellant after verifying that the appellant has made pre-deposit pursuant to their appeal against order dated 3

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

eal Nos. E/51191-51192/2014 vide Stay Order No.55134-55135/2014 dt.18.11.2014 (copy of which has been placed on record by Ld. Advocate during hearing). The appellant made pre-deposit of ₹ 32,62,000/- on 9.2.2016 in terms of Section 35F against the demand confirmed by Order-in-Original No.02/CE/Commissioner/FS/SNP/2015 dt.30.10.2015. Both sets of appeals were decided by this Tribunal in favour of the appellants vide Final Order No.A/61323-61326/2017-Ex (DB) dt.5.7.2017. The appellant approached the adjudicating authority for refund of pre-deposit made under Section 35FF along with interest by their application dated 2.8.2017. Refund of ₹ 32,62,000/- was sanctioned by the adjudicating authority on 9.11.2017. However, the adjudicating authority did not give any finding on the refund of interest made by the appellant and did not pass any order on the interest portion. Against the said order of the adjudicating authority, the appellant approached the Commissioner (Appeals) for r

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

00/- was made on 9.2.2016. The appellant have submitted that this was made pursuant to the order of Commissioner dt.30.10.2015. In their refund application before the adjudicating authority, the appellant has clearly stated that pre-deposit was made pursuant to the demand confirmed by the OIO dated 30.10.2015. The Tribunal s Final Order No.61323-61326/2017 dt.5.7.2017 was passed in respect of appeals No.E/51191-51192/2014 and E/104-105/2016. The appellant have placed on record Stay Order No.55134- 55135/2014-Ex (DB) dt.18.11.2014 wherein the requirement of central excise duty demand, interest and penalty has been completely waived. Hence, pre-deposit of ₹ 32,62,000/- does not pertain to the appeal of 2014. Other set of appeals in the above mentioned Final order pertain to the period after 6.8.2014 for which the appellant claim to have made pre-deposit and have stated so in their refund application. This aspect has been completely ignored by the adjudicating authority as well as f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (6) TMI 1410 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI – Refund of Education Cess on counter veiling duty – rejection on the ground of limitation and also on the ground of unjust enrichment – Held that:- In the case in hand, the authorities have not returned or rejected the refund claims filed by the appellant which was within time – the refund claim stands filed within one year of the amount paid wrongly, supporting documents were filed beyond the period of one year does not make the refund claim hit by limitation – refund cannot be rejected on this ground.
–
Unjust enrichment – Held that:- The appellant had filed the refund claim when he had already passed on the amount to his suppliers by raising a bill – It is also undisputed that the credit n

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

in had filed refund claims of the amounts paid on Customs duty i.e. Education Cess on counter veiling duty. The said refund claim came to be rejected on the ground of limitation as well as on the question of unjust enrichment. 4. Appellant had sought the refund of the amounts paid on 13.05.2013/20.05.2013 and filed the refund claim online on 26.12.2013. Appellants were informed in January, 2014 to submit supporting documents for the refund claim filed which was done so on 23.07.2014 after a delay of more than six months and lapse of one year from the date of payment of duty/ interest. It is also noticed that, appellant filed the refund claim in the present case consequent to issuance of credit notice which was issued on 10.07.2014 indicates

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d and on the reason of limitation, I find that both the lower authorities have erred in coming to such a conclusion. Undisputedly, the refund claim stands filed within one year of the amount paid wrongly, supporting documents were filed beyond the period of one year does not make the refund claim hit by limitation, is the ratio that can be deduced from the order of Tribunal in the case of Duraline India Pvt. Ltd. In the case in hand, the authorities have not returned or rejected the refund claims filed by the appellant which was within time. Hence the findings of the lower authorities held that the refund claims was filed beyond the period of limitation is in correct and is findings are struck down. 8. However, I find that appellant is not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

REGARDING WORK PROCESS OF SIB UNIT IN GST – GST – States – Circular No. 1819012/471 – Dated:- 24-5-2018 Circular – Trade Notice – Public Notice – Instructions – Office orders

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – SURYAKANT MITHBAVKAR – Dated:- 23-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 25-5-2018 – We have cleared material in month of Dec-17 to our customer in Himachal Pradesh with IGST Charged. we have filed GSTR1 showing details of supply in that particular transaction. Now, customer noticed that there is mistake in invoice in billing address. Customer want billing address should be in mumbai with their GSTN number and shipping address is in Himachal Pradesh to avail ITC on that particular transaction which is wrongly allotted to Himachal Pradesh Customer as per GSTR1 filed by us. Customer clarification is that they are going to make payment to us related transaction from their Mumbai Office so they also want to take ITC

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ou can amend/revise the details issued under the original invoice itself. Further, the same can be notified under column no 7A of GSTR 1. Relevant extract of the same from the said return has been reproduced hereunder for the sake of ready reference:- 7A. Amendment to Taxable outward supplies to consumer of earlier tax periods (original supplies covered under 7 above in earlier tax period (s)) Hope this will resolve your query. Regards Nitika Aggarwal 9953157961 – Reply By YAGAY and SUN – The Reply = Being Invoice is a primary document and the return is secondary and since, it is bill to ship transaction still in our view you must revise your Invoice first then your statutory returns. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = I concur with the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – By: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal – Dated:- 23-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 18-6-2018 – The GST law contains a provision on anti-profiteering measure as a deterrent for trade and industry to enjoy unjust enrichment in terms of profit arising out of implementation of Goods and Services Tax in India, i.e., anti-profiteering measure would obligate the businesses to pass on the cost benefit arising out of GST implementation to their customers. Section 171 provides that it is mandatory to pass on the benefit due to reduction in rate of tax or from input tax credit to the consumer by way of commensurate reduction in prices. As per rule 127, Anti­ Profiteering Authority (APA) shall be duty bound to: determine whether any reduction in rate of tax on any supply of goods or services or the benefit of the input tax credit has been passed on to the recipient by way of commensurate reduction in prices. identify the registered person who has not passed on the benefit of redu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Vrandavaneshwree Automotive Pvt Ltd (Respondent), a Bareilly-based Honda car dealer, by concluding that it did not contravene the anti-profiteering provisions of the Central GST Act, 2017. The order states that the Honda car dealer had passed on the benefit of the reduction in tax rate after GST to the applicant by way of reduction in the price of the car by ₹ 10,550. We find that the respondent (Honda car dealer) has given details of all the basic components of the price of the car purchased by the applicant … and benefit of ₹ 10,550 on account of reduction of tax by about 2 per cent viz. from 31.254 percent (pre GST) to 29 percent (post GST) has already been passed on to the applicant and the amount of ₹ 10,550 is inclusive of the ITC (input tax credit) … therefore, no additional benefit on account of ITC is required to be paid by the respondent . It was thus held that the respondent (Honda car dealer) has not contravened the provisions of Section 171 of the CG

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

as imposed on branded packed rice resulting in availability of input tax credit. It was reported that the India Gate brand was not registered brand and the product become taxable @ 5% only from 22.09.2017 vide Notification No. 28/2017-CT (Rate) dated 22.09.2017. It was observed that the rice manufacturer was able to take input tax credit ranging from 2.69% to 3% during September – November, 2017. It was contended that the GST rate on outward supply of their product was 5% and the ITC available to discharge the GST liability was not sufficient and the balance amount of GST was paid by the Respondent in cash therefore, there was no benefit of ITC which could be passed on to the consumers. Further, the prices of 'rice' being an agricultural product, changed frequently because of the market forces and the other cost factors and were not solely dependent on the tax rates. It also contended that the price of paddy had increased by more than 30% in the year 2017 as compared to the yea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

at the ITC available to then as a percentage of the total value of taxable supplies was between 2.69% to 3% whereas the GST on the outward supply of his product was 5% which was not sufficient to discharge its tax liability. Moreover, in this case the rate of tax has been increased from 0% to 5% instead of reduction in the same. Therefore, there was no reason for treating the price fixed by the Respondent as violation of the provisions of the Anti-Profiteering clause. Also, there was an increase in the purchase price of paddy in the year 2017 as compared to its price during the year 2016 which constitutes major part of the cost of the above product. It is further revealed from the record that the Respondent had increased the MRP of his product from ₹ 540/- to ₹ 585/- which constituted increase of 8.33% keeping in view the increase in the purchase price. Therefore, due to the imposition of the GST on the above product as well as the increase in the purchase price of the padd

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – MANASH MUKHERJEE – Dated:- 23-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 25-5-2018 – Dear Sir, A taxpayer availed ITC againt TRAN 1 under para 5(a) . But actually the credit should have been on 6(a) , i.e. capital goods. How the things can be corrected or is the credit to be reversed by the taxpayer only on the ground that he wrongly filed TRAN 1 . With regards, M.Mukherjee. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Credit has to reversed along with interest and penalty in o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =