Author: admin_gst

2018 (7) TMI 157 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI – CENVAT credit – input services – demurrage charges – it was alleged that appellant availed the cenvat credit of service tax paid for services which were in the nature of penalty and cannot be treated as input service – Held that:- The service provider would charge penalty or demurrage for failure to receive the guranteed quantity for a certain period. On perusal of the agreement, it is clear that the said charges are related to the service provided by the service provider – the service rendered by M/s IMC Ltd. is in respect of manufacturing of excisable goods – denial of credit unjustified.
–
In the present case, the appellant availed MS pipeline facility belonging to M/s IMC Ltd. The service provider paid the tax which cannot be denied and therefore, the availment of cenvat credit by the recipient unit cannot be denied.
–
Appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Ex. Appeal No.75315/18 – FO/A/76034/2018 – Dated:- 19-3-2018 – S

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

payment has been availed by the appellant. According to the Revenue, the appellant has availed credit of service tax for such services which were not rendered by the service provider and were basically in the nature of penalty and therefore, the appellant is not entitled to avail the cenvat credit. A show cause notice dated 30 July 2013 was issued proposing demand of cenvat credit for the period from Nov 2012 to May 2013. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of cenvat of ₹ 1,84,072/- along with interest and also imposed penalty equal to the amount of duty. By the impugned order, the Commission (Appeals) rejected the appeal filed by the appellant. Hence, the present appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that in this case the appellant availed the cenvat credit of service tax paid for services which were in the nature of penalty and cannot be treated as input service as defined under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Cre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n of every year. Should the annual throughput exceed 20000 MT per annum then for the additional cargo above 20000 MT the Pipeline Utilisation Charges shall be ₹ 25/- per MT. If for any reason whatsoever, the Company is unable to pump/transfer the liquid cargo so required by Party and the Party is in no way responsible for such failure then for the period of disruption the minimum guaranteed quantity shall be reduced proportionately. 5. There is no dispute that service tax is payable for providing service by M/s IMC in respect of transfer of liquid cargo to the appellant s premises. The service provider would charge penalty or demurrage for failure to receive the guranteed quantity for a certain period. On perusal of the agreement, it is clear that the said charges are related to the service provided by the service provider. The appellant contended that inward transportation of inputs has been specifically covered under the inclusive definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

no application to the facts before me in the present case. 5.2 In the case before me, the issue is whether the credit can be denied even if the duty has been paid wrongly by the supplier of inputs. This Tribunal in a number of cases cited supra relied upon by the lower appellate authority has clearly held that the excise authorities having jurisdiction over the recipient of inputs cannot reopen the classification adopted by the officer having jurisdiction over the input supplier. In the present case, it is not the case of the Revenue that the excise authorities having jurisdiction over the input supplier has questioned the classification and held that the payment of duty was incorrect. If that be so, the authorities at the receiver s end cannot question the classification or payment of duty and deny the Cenvat credit in respect of the duty paid by the supplier of the goods and borne by the receiver . 7. In the present case, the appellant availed MS pipeline facility belonging to M/s IM

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (11) TMI 1457 – CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT – TMI – Non-speaking order – Validity of remand of the case – Held that:- Admittedly, the legal issues on which the case would be decided on merits, even after remit, would be the same as has been decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Vandana Global [2018 (5) TMI 305 – CHHATTISGARH, HIGH COURT] – Therefore, there is no point in remitting the matter back to the Tribunal for decision afresh as the case would involve the same structural steel items which were subject matter of decision making by the Division Bench in the matter of Vandana Global – appeal dismissed. – TAXC No. 14 of 2018 Dated:- 19-3-2018 – SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA AND SHRI RAM PRASANNA SHARMA JJ. For the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

estion as to whether the subject goods, MS Joists, MS Channels, Angles, MS Beams, HR Coil, MS plates, JC sheets, HR sheets, and other steel products and cement commonly known as structural steel items (henceforth 'structural steel items') would fall within the meaning of capital goods or input is also involved in these appeals. 3. While agreeing with the submission made by Shri Maneesh Sharma, learned counsel for the Revenue, that if an order is non-speaking or unreasoned it hinders judicial review by the Higher Courts, therefore, it is required to be set aside so that a detailed order is passed by the Tribunal or any other Subordinate Adjudicatory Body enabling the Superior Court to examine the correctness of the reasoning assigned

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appellate Tribunal (CMA 3814/2014 and connections) that either before 7.7.2009 or in view of the clarificatory amendment made on 07.07.2009 in the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the Structural Steel Items would be inputs and as such liable to avail CENVAT Credit. 4. It is stated at the bar that the revenue is processing the matter for filing an SLP against the judgment in the matter of Vandana Global (supra). Admittedly, the legal issues on which the case would be decided on merits, even after remit, would be the same as has been decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Vandana Global (supra). Therefore, there is no point in remitting the matter back to the Tribunal for decision afresh as the case would involve the same s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 14/2018 – Dated:- 19-3-2018 – OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CUSTOM HOUSE: PORT AREA: VISAKHAPATNAM – 530 035 F. No. P3/06/2017 – A.M. (Pt.1) Date: 19.03.2018 PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 14/2018 Sub:- reg. ***** Attention of Importers, Exporters, Customs Brokers and Members of Trade is invited to this office Public Notices No. 49/2017, dated 08.11.2017, No. 09/2018, dated 26.02.2018, No. 12/2018, dated 09.03.2018 and No. 13/2018, dated 14.03.2018. 2. IGST Refund Module for exports is operational in ICES from 10/10/2017. The module has an inbuilt procedure to automatically grant refund after validating the Shipping Bill data available with Customs against the GST Returns data available with GSTN. The procedure also returns error/response codes in case there is any discrepancy. A number of representations were received by Board from the stakeholders seeking resolution of various problems encountered in sanction of refund of IGST paid on exports of goo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

oods exported out of India, once both the Export General Manifest (EGM) and valid return in Form GSTR-3 or Form GSTR-3B, as the case may be, has been filed. In other words, filing of EGM, apart from filing of Shipping Bill and GSTR-3B is a mandatory requirement for processing refund claim. The Shipping Lines / Agents have been filing EGM electronically for exports originating from gateway ports. However, for cargo originating from ICDs, the Shipping Lines / Agents were filing EGM in manual mode. Absence of electronic EGMs and their integration with local EGMs has been the major obstacle in processing of refund claims in the case of exports from ICDs. 4. In order to overcome this issue, the Shipping Lines have been mandated to include the Shipping Bills originating from ICDs while filing the electronic EGMs at the gateway ports. In cases where the EGMs have not been incorporated the Shipping Bills pertaining to ICDs, the Shipping Lines / Agents have been asked to file supplementary EGMs

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rors in local and gateway EGM, wherever necessary. 6. The jurisdictional officers at the gateway port shall strictly monitor the EGM pendency and error reports available in ICES, The officers at the gateway port shall resolve the EGM errors in an expeditious manner by asking the Shipping Lines / Agents to file requisite amendments and approving those amendments on ICES. In cases, where there are errors either in the Shipping Bill or in the local EGM (i.e. truck or train summary), the remedial action shall be taken by the jurisdictional officer in 1CD. 7. It has been observed that mis-match of information provided in local and gateway EGM mainly occurs because of (i) incorrect gateway port code in local EGM (error M); (ii) change in container for LCL cargo or mistakes committed while entering container number (error C); (iii) incorrect count of containers (error N); (iv) mistakes in entering the nature of cargo – LCL or FCL (error T); and (v) the Let Export Order is given in ICES after

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – G.O.Ms.No.79 – Dated:- 18-3-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION G.O.Ms.No.79, DATED 18-3-2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No.23 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following Rules further to amend the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:- (1) These Rules may be called the Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Third Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) Save as otherwise provided in these rules, they shall come into force with effect from 23rd March, 2018. 2. In the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017,- i) in Rule 45, in sub-rule (1), after the words, "where such goods are sent directl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

principal."; (ii) in Rule 124 – (a) in sub-rule (4), in the first proviso, after the words "Provided that", the letter "a" shall be inserted; (b) in sub-rule (5), in the first proviso, after the words "Provided that", the letter "a" shall be inserted; (iii) for Rule 125, the following rule shall be substituted, namely:- "125. Secretary to the Authority.- An officer not below the rank of Additional Commissioner (working in the Directorate General of Safeguards) shall be the Secretary to the Authority."; (iv) in Rule 127, in clause (iv), after the words "to furnish a performance report to the Council by the tenth", the word "day" shall be inserted; (v) in Rule 129, in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ct and these rules."; (vii) for Rule 134, the following Rule shall be substituted, namely:- "134. Decision to be taken by the majority.- (1) A minimum of three members of the Authority shall constitute quorum at its meetings. (2) If the Members of the Authority differ in their opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members present and voting, and in the event of equality of votes, the Chairman shall have the second or casting vote."; (viii) after Rule 137, in the Explanation, in clause (c), after sub-clause (b), the following sub-clause shall be inserted, namely:- "c. any other person alleging, under sub-rule (1) of Rule 128, that a registered person has not passe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Nihal Shaikh – Dated:- 17-3-2018 Last Replied Date:- 19-3-2018 – Dear Sir,Our business type is Steel trading & we doing transactions of purchase and sale of steel only (no other service).We had taken Labour service from a Labour Service provider and he charged us extra rate in his GST bill Now we want to raise a debit note of a rate difference on him, In this debit note should we charge him GST? OR without GST? – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = A labour contractor has provided/supplied Manpower Service to you and he has charged for that. Should he not charge GST from you ? You are service receiver. Why the question of raising a debit note on account of rate difference ? – Reply By Nihal Shaikh – The Reply = Sir,This is not actually Manpower Service this service is Testing of material and he mentioned in his bill as Labour Charges . Also he wants to charge us GST in BILL,In this situation what can we do? He not agreed to raise Credit note

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Corrects bill as Testing Charges with charging us GST & we want to raise Debit note on Him for extra charges then what should we do..? Charge him GST in Debit note or wthout GST? – Reply By SHIVKUMAR SHARMA – The Reply = Dear Sir,As per GST Rule debit note/Credit note will be issued only by Goods/Service Supplier. – Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan – The Reply = Sir, According to Section 34 (3) of CGST Act, 2017 Where a tax invoice has been issued for supply of any goods or services or both and the taxable value or tax charged in that tax invoice is found to exceed the taxable value or tax payable in respect of such supply, or where the goods supplied are returned by the recipient, or where goods or services or both supplied are found to be deficient, the registered person, who has supplied such goods or services or both, may issue to the recipient a credit note containing such particulars as may be prescribed. According to rule 53 (1) of CGST Rules, 2017 A revised tax invoice ref

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

axable supply of goods or services, rate of tax and the amount of the tax credited or, as the case may be, debited to the recipient; and (j) signature or digital signature of the supplier or his authorised representative. From the above it is clear that the registered person, who has supplied such goods or services or both, may issue to the recipient a credit note containing such particulars as indicated in rule 53 (1) of CGST Rules, 2017. The recipient cannot issue a credit/debit note under CGST Act. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Well explained by Sh.Ranganathan Sir. I agree with him entirely. – Reply By Nihal Shaikh – The Reply = Thank You very much all of you Sir. – Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan – The Reply = Sir,I explained the legal position regarding Credit/Debit note in my reply dated 17.03.2017. From the practical point of view though the supplier had paid duty at higher rate and issued taxable invoice to you , you simply avail the credit of gst paid at higher rate

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

te. Its a mistake by the department {but they cant also introspect every transaction, they are humans} but unless un until with autofill of rates is given in common portal, In portal based on HSN auto populate of rates should come which is missing due to which many people are taking negative advantage of it. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = We talk of legal aspects. Practically the department may or may not be able to detect/examine such lapse it does not mean we should shut our eyes. No assessee would like to take risk of interest and penalty. We cannot forget that every assessee is subject to audit. More over Range Officers and Preventive Officers are to monitor and supervise. For law abiding persons it is wise to take credit as per ITC Rules. Any party who charges in excess and deposit with Govt. can claim refund. In that situation, what would be the fate of ITC ? Govt. Has sufficient time period to detect such lapses that extended period. Whether it is pre-GST era or post GST

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – vivin vijay – Dated:- 17-3-2018 Last Replied Date:- 20-3-2018 – Dear expert, I am currently working in bank, wherein I have purchased furnitures under the furniture allowance of the bank, the purchsses were made in 2015 and 2016, wherein I had paid VAT, (GST was not implemented at that time), these furnitures were purchased in the name of bank, now since I am leaving the organization , I have to purchase it back from the bank at depreciated cost, my bank while has depreciated the value, but has charged me GST on the depreciated value , my question is is GST applicable? Does it not come under the section 32(5) , where in a second hand good will not come under GST as the selling price is Lower than purc

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

cludes VAT as well ? Currently, the value including GST , makes the price of the second hand good which was purchased two years become more expensive then it's purchase price , as the the GST ranges between as high as 28 percent on the LCD and 18 percent on the furniture. Also one more question since in this transaction the bank is a seller of furniture hence by the nature it becomes a dealer even though the principal activity is not to sell furniture. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Bank cannot be termed as a dealer by any stretch of imagination. By selling second hand goods Bank does not become a dealer at all. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Dear Querist, Peruse replies of Sh.Sanjay Malhotra, C.S. in respect of Issue ID

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nts calculated by straight line method as specified below for each quarter or a year or part thereof from the date of taking the Cenvat Credit, namely.(i) for computers and computer peripherals : For each quarter in the first year @ 10% For each quarter in the second year @ 8% For each quarter in the third year @ 5% For each quarter in the fourth and fifth year @ 1% (ii) for capital goods, other than computers and computer peripherals @ 2.5% for each quarter :Provided that if the amount so calculated is less than the amount equal to the duty leviable on transaction value, the amount to be paid shall be equal to the duty leviable on transaction value.(b) If the capital goods are cleared as waste and scrap, the manufacturer shall pay an amoun

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Collection of 1% tax on agri items as cess by gari market commitee t – Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Padmanabham Jaladi – Dated:- 17-3-2018 Last Replied Date:- 17-3-2018 – In andhrapradesh ag

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 16-3-2018 – Based on the various representations received from the trade and industry, the GST Council has recommended a number of measures pertaining to change in Goods and Services tax rate and policy including the GST rates on eateries and small traders. Some of these decisions which have been implemented by the issuance of the requisite notifications and circulars are detailed below: Rationalization of GST Policy measures: Increase in the aggregate annual turnover threshold for eligibility under the composition scheme from ₹ 75 lakh to Rs. one crore for 27 States (including Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand). Increase in the aggregate annual turnover threshold for eligibility under the Com

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

urers and traders. The turnover of taxable goods to be considered for eligibility for the Composition scheme for traders. Supply of exempted services by Composition taxpayer will be allowed and the same will not be taken into account while computing the aggregate turnover. Amount of late fee payable for delayed filing of return in Form GSTR-3B by a taxpayer whose tax liability for the month was Nil reduced to ₹ 20/- per day (Rs.10/- per day each under CGST & SGST Acts) subject to maximum ₹ 5000/-under each Act from October, 2017. The amount of late fee payable for delayed filing of return in Form GSTR-3B by other taxpayers reduced to ₹ 50/- per day (Rs. 25/- per day each under CGST & SGST Acts) subject to maximum &

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

mber of representations were received from the trade and industry regarding GST rates on goods and services. Based on these representations the GST Council reviewed the rates on goods and services in its subsequent meetings including GST rates on eateries which has been reduced from 18% with ITC to 5% without ITC, including a restaurant located in the premises of a hotel having unit of accommodation with declared tariff below ₹ 7500/-. The changes in the GST rate structure and policy have been recommended by the GST Council keeping in view the representations received from trade and industry and the interests of consumers and the same are expected to benefit the overall economy and consumers. The revenue loss on account of the rationa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 16-3-2018 – The Government is aware of instances where taxes are collected by many service providers, hoteliers, traders etc. from the customers but are not deposited in the Government s account. Based on specific intelligence collected, detailed investigations are carried out and the due tax amount is either recovered or quasi-judicial proceedings are initiated. The details of such losses are as below: Financial Year No. of cases Amount detected (Rs. Crores) 2015-16 1097 1501.49 2016-17 1086 1311.34 2017-18 (till Feb 2018) 743 766.67 Total 2926 3579.5 In order to encourage compliant behavior under GST, the Government has undertaken a massive awareness and educational campaign by regularly issuing adv

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 16-3-2018 – It has been noticed that at regular intervals, unverified estimates of pending GST refunds on account of exports are published in the print media or put forward by various trade bodies. These figures are highly speculative and mostly inaccurate. It is a fact that while a number of exporters have not been able to get the export refunds so far others have been granted refunds. In order to overcome the causes of the delay in sanctioning of refunds, Government has taken various steps, which includes amendments in the rules, changes in the business procedures of common portal and customs automated system to address the systemic issues. Many of the errors plaguing the claims for refunds are on a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – 06/2018 – Dated:- 16-3-2018 – Circular No. 06/2018-Customs F. No.450/119/2017-Cus-IV (Pt.) Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise And Customs Room No. 227B, North Block, New Delhi. Dated the 16th March, 2018 To All Principal Chief commissioner/Chief Commissioners of Customs/Customs (Preventive) All Principal Chief Commissioners/Chief Commissioners of Customs & Central Tax All Principal Commissioners/Commissioners of Customs/Customs (Preventive) Subject: reg. IGST Refund module for exports is operational in ICES from 10.10.2017. The module has an inbuilt procedure to automatically grant refund after validating the Shipping Bill data available with Customs against the GST Returns data available with GSTN. The procedure also returns error/response codes in case there is any discrepancy. A number of representations have been received from the stakeholders seeking resolution of various problems encountered in sanction of refund

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, has been filed. In other words, filing of EGM, apart from filing of shipping bill and GSTR 3B is a mandatory requirement for processing refund claim. The Shipping lines/agents have been filing EGM electronically for exports originating from gateway ports. However, for cargo originating from ICDs, the Shipping lines/agents were filing EGM in manual mode. Absence of electronic EGMs and their integration with local EGMs has been the major obstacle in processing of refund claims in the case of exports from ICDs. 3. In Order to overcome this issue, the Shipping lines have been mandated to include the shipping bills originating from ICDs while filing the electronic EGMs at the gateway ports. In cases where the EGMs have not incorporated the shipping bills pertaining to ICDs, the Shipping lines/agents have been asked to file supplementary EGMs. While the Shipping lines have been largely cooperative in filling regular or supplementary EGMs for cargo originating from ICDS, there are still man

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ailable in ICES. The officers at the gateway port have to resolve the EGM errors in an expeditious manner by asking the Shipping lines/agents to file requisite amendments and approving those amendments on ICES. In cases, where there are errors either in the shipping bill or in the local EGM (i.e. truck or train summary), the remedial action has to be taken by jurisdictional officer in ICD. 6. It has been observed that mis-match of information provided in local and gateway EGM mainly occurs because of (i) incorrect gateway port code in local EGM (error M), (ii) change in container for LCL cargo or mistakes committed while entering container number (error C), (iii) incorrect count of containers (error N), (iv) mistakes in entering the nature of cargo – LCL or FCL (error T), (v) the let export order is given in ICES after sailing date of the vessel (error L), ICES has provision to correct all aforementioned errors. The procedure to be followed for each type of error has been clearly delin

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (3) TMI 1239 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI – Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to call for the records comprising communication dated 26.02.2018 – case of petitioner is that since the petitioner was not provided with the Order in Original dated 23.03.2016 so far, the petitioner is not in a position to file an Appeal as against the said order – Held that: – the petitioner shall give a representation to the 1st respondent seeking for a copy of the Order in Original dated 23.03.2016 today itself and on receipt of the same, the 1st respondent shall furnish the copy of the Order in Original on or before 20.03.2018 – petition disposed off. – W.P.No.4620 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.5695 of 2018 Dated:- 16-3-2018 – M. Duraiswamy, J. For the Petitioner :

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

for a copy of the Order in Original. 3.Mr.S.Rajasekar, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submitted that if in case the petitioner submitts their representation today seeking for a copy of the Order in Original dated 23.03.2016, the same would be provided to the petitioner on or before 20.03.2018. 4.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the petitioner shall give a representation to the 1st respondent seeking for a copy of the Order in Original dated 23.03.2016 today itself and on receipt of the same, the 1st respondent shall furnish the copy of the Order in Original on or before 20.03.2018. The petitioner is granted a week's time for filing an Appeal before the Appellate Authority as again

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – G.O. Ms. No. 36 – Dated:- 16-3-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU COMMERCIAL TAXES AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT [G.O. Ms. No. 36, Commercial Taxes and Registration (B1), 16th March 2018, Panguni 2, Hevilambi, Thiruvalluvar Aandu, 2049] No. II(2)/CTR/284(d)/2018. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (2) of rule 123 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and in supercession of the Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Notification No.II(2)/CTR/838(d)/2017,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (4) TMI 970 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Rectification of Mistake – Tribunal in final order dated 18/08/2017 in paragraph No. has recorded that the first appellate authority has recorded in paragraph No. 8 that appellant had not filed any reply to the notice but also did not appear to lead defence in spite of several opportunities granted – Held that: – There seems to be error an apparent on the face of the record in final order No. A/89451/17/ SMB dated 18/08/2017 – The application filed by the Revenue for recall of the order, needs to be allowed and the final order dated 18/08/2017 recalled and direct the Registry to list the appeal to its original number and list the same for final disposal – Application for rectification of mistake is

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

es granted. On recording such finding that Tribunal remitted the matter back to the first appellate authority. 4. It is the case of the Revenue in the application for rectification of mistake that the first appellate authority in the order dated 3 1/10/2016 in paragraph No.8 specifically recorded that appellant has appeared and argued the matter in detail. 5. On perusal of the order dated 31/10/2017 in appeal No. ST/85217/2017, I do find it so. There seems to be error an apparent on the face of the record in final order No. A/89451/17/ SMB dated 18/08/2017. The application filed by the Revenue for recall of the order, in my view, needs to be allowed and I recall the final order dated 18/08/2017 and direct the Registry to list the appeal to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (6) TMI 792 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 253 (Tri. – Chennai) – Commercial Coaching or Training Service – appellants are engaged in running a Spoken English Language Coaching Center along with personality development in the name of “ZEAL” – Levy of Service Tax – Held that:- The personality development course conducted by the appellant includes developing effective communication, ability to interact with people, English Language speaking skills, personal grooming and Dining Etiquettes, Interview and Group Discussion Training, Presentation Skills and Body language etc. These are intended to develop overall skills of the students in order to facilitate them to obtain employment. As per the definition of “Vocational Training Course” if it intends to help the candidates / trainee to obtain self-employment directly or under the employer would quality as ‘vocational training’.
–
The Tribunal in the case of Mariya Computer Systems [2017 (1) TMI 37 – CESTAT NEW DELHI] has

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

along with interest and also for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand, interest and also imposed penalties. In appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence these appeals. 3. On behalf of the appellant, Ld. Counsel Ms. P. Syrija submitted the details of the period involved as well as the amounts in these appeals which are given in the table as furnished by the appellant as under : S.No. Appellant Appeal No. Period Involved ST demanded (Rs.) 1. C.S.Natarajan ST/41005/2013 April 2004 to June 2009 10,74,868 2. Ranjana Bagry ST/41061/2013 April 2004 to June 2009 3,65,193 3. Aruna R. Krishnan ST/41931/2016 April 2004 to July 2009 22,80,008 4. Aruna R. Krishnan ST/41932/2016 Aug 2009 to March 2010 1,25,663 5. D. Sankar ST/41510/2016 April 2004 to June 2009 6,49,240 6. D. Sankar ST/41511/2013 July 2009 to Dec 2009 26,254 She submitted that the said course conducted by the appellant falls within the category of vocational traini

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

g course eligible for exemption; that the course conducted by the appellant does not fall under the above list and therefore are not eligible for exemption. 5. Heard both sides. 6. On perusal of records, we find that the personality development course conducted by the appellant includes developing effective communication, ability to interact with people, English Language speaking skills, personal grooming and Dining Etiquettes, Interview and Group Discussion Training, Presentation Skills and Body language etc. These are intended to develop overall skills of the students in order to facilitate them to obtain employment. As per the definition of Vocational Training Course if it intends to help the candidates / trainee to obtain self-employment directly or under the employer would quality as vocational training . The relevant part of the notification No.24/2004-ST dt. 10.09.2004 is reproduced as under : In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 93 of the Finance Ac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (7) TMI 77 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – 100% EOU – Refund for unutilized cenvat credit – rejection on the ground of time limitation, non-registration of premises, nexus of input services with output services and also on the ground that the adjudicating authority added the turnover of the SEZ units also thereby reducing the eligibility of the refund amount – Held that:- In the case of service providers exporting 100% of their services, there should not be any dispute with regard to time bar – refund claim is not hit by time bar.
–
Refund claim rejection on the ground of non-registration of premises – Held that:- The issue whether respondent is eligible for credit before registration of the premises is decided in the case of m-Portal India Wireless Solutions P. Ltd. Vs CST Bangalore [2011 (9) TMI 450 – KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], where it was held that Registration not compulsory for refund.
–
Refund claim rejection on the ground of addition of turnover of the SEZ units to that of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

akrishnan, Consultant For the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The MAs filed by Revenue for change of cause title are allowed. 2. The above appeals are filed by the department aggrieved by the order of Commissioner (Appeals) who set aside the order passed by the original authority rejecting the refund claim filed by the respondent (assessee) on various grounds. 3. On behalf of the appellant, Ld. A.R. Shri K.P. Muralidharan reiterated the grounds of appeal stated in the appeals filed by the department. 4.1 On behalf of respondent, the Ld. Consultant Shri Srikanth Balakrishnan explained that respondent is a 100% EOU filed refund for unutilized cenvat credit in terms of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No.5/2005-CE (NT) dt. 1.3.2006. The original authority rejected the refund claim on various grounds which are as under: (i) The refund claims are hit by time bar since the refund claims for the period 2008-09 have been filed by the respondent in the year 2011. (ii) C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

f credit of the past period in subsequent quarters. So also, it is noted that in the case of service providers exporting 100% of their services, there should not be any dispute with regard to time bar. Taking note of the aforesaid circular, we hold that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly granted the relief, wherein the refund claim is not hit by time bar. 7. The issue whether respondent is eligible for credit before registration of the premises is decided in the case of m-Portal India Wireless Solutions P. Ltd. Vs CST Bangalore – 2011-TIOL-928-HC-KAR-ST = 2012 (STR) ELT 134 (Kar.). Following the same, we hold the issue in favour of respondent. 8. With regard to the issue of adding the turnover of the SEZ units to that of the total turnover of the respondent the Commissioner (Appeals) has discussed in para 5.2 we find that the formula applied by the Commissioner (Appeals) excluding the turnover of the SEZ units is correct and proper. 9. The next issue is with regard to the credit al

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (7) TMI 1261 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS HARYANA – TMI – Whether local cable operators to whom signals of cable TV are provided by the applicant as MSO are agents of the applicant for the purpose of liability to GST of the applicants on services provided by the LCO to the end customers?
–
Held that:- Applicant has presented an application for withdrawal Of their application dated 20.12.2017 filed for seeking advance ruling. The request is acceded to – application dismissed as withdrawn. – AAR No. HAR/HAAR/R/2017-18/1 Dated:- 16-3-2018 – VIJAY KUMAR SINGH AND MS. SANGEETA KARMAKAR (MEMBER) Sh. R.K. Hasija, Advocate for the applicant. Vijay Kumar Singh. (Member) As per the statement of facts submitted, the applicant is in the b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Basha AbdulRazack – Dated:- 15-3-2018 Last Replied Date:- 19-3-2018 – I need to clarify the point for the partly Job work Invoice Issue.We are sending goods (A) to another company for Job work for which the job worker added some consumables (B) from their end and send it back to us (C)I need clarification;1. Can we raise GST Invoice for (A) product or sending in DC as Job work 2. Job Worker added only the value of B and their Labour work and charging GST is it correct? (They have not added the value of product A because they are receiving the product A in DC)Please Explain. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = As per Section 143(2) of the GST Act, the responsibility for accountability of inputs or c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

. – Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani – The Reply = Sending goods on Delivery challan is the correct method. it also benefits to you in the sense that if you raise tax invoice it will be supply and tax has to be paid by you. after work is over the job worker will have to again raise tax invoice on you as it would amount to supply for him . in order to avoid all these trouble the procedure of job work has been given in law. you have to send goods on delivery challan and get back the goods under delivery challan without paying any tax. tax would be applicable on the job work charges. the only conditon is that the material send under delivery challan for processing need to be received back within 1 year. if not received within the said period tax woul

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – harkirat singh – Dated:- 15-3-2018 Last Replied Date:- 27-12-2018 – Dear Sir,We are exporting goods after payment of IGST amount @ 18% since 01.07.2017 as on date.We are unable to check status of IGST refund on ICEGATE Site.On site www.icegate.gov.in we are checking GSTIN Enquiry it is showing shipping bill no. and date and invoice no. and date, EGM no. and date for all the shipping bills we have filed on ICD Sonepat (INBDM6)But when we are checking IGST Validation details on site it is showingWe have already filed Relevant GSTR returnIGST Validation Details EnquiryNo record found for Given inputKindly advice solution.RegardsHarkirat SinghEmail : harkirat957@gmail.com – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Repl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Refund of GST – exports of goods and services – exporter, at his option, may file refund claim for one calendar month / quarter or by clubbing successive calendar months / qua

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Refund of GST – BRC / FIRC for export of goods – insistence on proof of realization of export proceeds for processing of refund claims related to export of goods has not been

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Refund of GST – exports of goods and services – taxes paid under existing laws – efunds of tax/duty paid under the existing law shall be disposed of in accordance with the pro

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Refund of GST – exports of goods and services – Supplies to Merchant Exporters at a concessional rate of 0.05% and 0.1% – the exporter will be eligible to take credit of the t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Refund of GST – exports of goods and services – the transitional credit pertains to duties and taxes paid under the existing laws viz., under Central Excise Act, 1944 and Chap

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Refund of GST – exports of goods and services – once an application has been submitted afresh, pursuant to a deficiency memo, the proper officer will not serve another deficie

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =