Shunson CJ, Proprietor, Four Star Associates, Perumatty Versus The State Tax Officer, The Asst. State Tax Officer

Shunson CJ, Proprietor, Four Star Associates, Perumatty Versus The State Tax Officer, The Asst. State Tax Officer
GST
2018 (4) TMI 580 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 15-3-2018
WP(C). No. 8823 of 2018
GST
P. B. Suresh Kumar, J.
For the Petitioner : Sri. Harisankar V. Menon
For the Respondent : Smt. M. M. Jasmine
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks release of the goods detained by the second respondent under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Ta

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND C. EX. Versus SAI CONSULTING ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.

COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND C. EX. Versus SAI CONSULTING ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.
Service Tax
2018 (5) TMI 1425 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT – 2018 (15) G. S. T. L. 708 (Guj.)
GUJARAT HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 15-3-2018
TAX APPEAL NO. 123 of 2018
Service Tax
MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. B. N. KARIA, JJ.
For The Petitioner : Priyank P Lodha (7852)
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
The appeal is filed by the department challenging the judgment of CESTAT dated 13.6.2017 raising the following question for our consideration :
“Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Hon'ble Tribunal has committed substantial error of law by quashing and setting aside the OIO dated 6/5/2011 holding that si

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the cases of nonpayment of tax on any ground whatsoever. The penalty that authority could impose under Section 78 is hundred per cent of the amount of the service tax evaded. On the other hand, the penalty under Section 76 which could be imposed is at the fixed amount per day for the entire duration of the failure to deposit the tax which, in any case, would not exceed fifty percent of the service tax payable.
10. The tenor, background and the purpose for which the penalty could be imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, is entirely different than in case of Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. However, the language of Section 76 did not specifically exclude the situation; otherwise covered under Section 78 namely nonpayment o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e nature of this further proviso and the relevant position of the two statutory provisions both pertaining to penalty, we are convinced that the proviso was in the nature of clarificatory amendment and not creating a liability for the first time. Even without the aid to this further proviso to Section 78, one entire plausible view was that the situation envisaged under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, would exclude those cases covered under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. In other words, Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, would cover only the cases of nonpayment of service tax which are not related to fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, suppression of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of the said Chapter or the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ford Motor Private Ltd. Versus CGST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate

Ford Motor Private Ltd. Versus CGST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 380 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 15-3-2018
ST/41049/2016 to ST/41069/2016 – FINAL ORDER No. 40837-40857/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) and Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical)
Shri Rabeen Jayaram, Advocate For the Appellant
Shri  K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) For the Respondent
ORDER
The MAs filed by Revenue for change of cause title are allowed.
2.  The present set of appeals have been filed against the impugned Order-in-Appeal Nos.103 to 123/2016 (STA-I) dt. 22.2.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals-I) Chennai. In the said OIA, the Commissioner (Appeals) has disposed of a batch of 21 appeals filed before him against various orders-in-original covering the period September 2009 to March 2012. 
3.  The dispute in all these cases is refund of unutilized cenvat cre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ent before Tribunal which were decided vide Final Order No. 40658-40671 / 2018 dt. 14.03.2018.  He submitted that the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) pertaining to the period prior to January 2012 covered in the present impugned order is infructuous and the order passed should be considered as null and void.
4.2  With reference to Appeal No.ST/41065/2016, covering the period January 2012 to March 2012, the counsel submitted that the appellant will be entitled to the cenvat credit already availed under Rule 2 (l) of the CCR 204. Accordingly, the refund under Rule 5 is to be paid to the appellant.  However, he fairly concedes that the FIRCs for an amount of Rs. 49,54,919/- was not produced before the lower authorities at the time of consideration of the refund claims.  He further submits that such FIRCs have since been received and appellant is in a position to produce the same for verification, if an opportunity is given.
4.3  Ld.counsel also submit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

from 1.4.2011.
6.  Heard both sides and perused the records.
7.  The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has disposed of 21 appeals filed before him.  After perusal of records, we find that, as pointed out by the appellant, the issues pertaining to the period prior to January 2012 stands already disposed of by the Commissioner (Appeals) in his earlier order. Since the finding in the present order appears to have been passed without noticing such fact, we have no hesitation in holding that this part of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) order is null and void since the same had already been decided by his earlier order. To this extent, we dispose of Appeals ST/41049-41069/2016 (other than ST/41065/2016) as infructuous.
8.  Next, we turn to the disputes for the period January 2012 to March 2012.  The appellant has availed cenvat credit in respect of various services namely Air Travel Agent, Business Auxiliary Service, Courier Agency, Custom Hous

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tted by the appellant that FIRCs for an amount of Rs. 49 lakhs, which could not be produced before the lower authorities during  the earlier proceedings, are now available with the appellant and can be produced for verification. In view of the above submissions, we are of the view that a further opportunity is required to be given to the appellant for submission of such FIRCs for verification before the original authority who will consider the same before passing order in the de novo proceeding for the period Jan-March 2012.
10.  From a perusal of the earlier OIA No.89 to 110/2014 (M-ST) dt. 14.03.2014, it is seen that the issue whether the credit utilized can be deducted from the total credit availed by the appellant for applying the formula has been held in favour of the assessee. Following the same, we set aside the method of arriving at the refund claim by the authorities below in the present order.
11.  In the result, the impugned orders in respect of Appeal Nos.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CCE, Salem, M/s. Diafina Enterprises, M/s. C. Kalavathy and M/s. Sangamitra Service Agency Versus M/s. Mukesh & Associates, CCE, Salem and Commissioner of GST & CE, Chennai South

CCE, Salem, M/s. Diafina Enterprises, M/s. C. Kalavathy and M/s. Sangamitra Service Agency Versus M/s. Mukesh & Associates, CCE, Salem and Commissioner of GST & CE, Chennai South
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 381 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 15-3-2018
ST/41149/2014-DB, ST/41202/2013-DB, ST/42002/2015-DB, ST/248/2010-DB – Final Order No. 40801-40804/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) and Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical)
Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Appellant
Shri Akhil Suresh, Advocate for the 1st Respondent
Smt. L. Maithili, Advocate for the 2nd to 4th Respondents
ORDER
The issue arising in all these appeals being the same, they were heard together and are disposed by this common order.
2.  The ld. Advocates appearing for the appellants submitted that demand of service tax has been raised on the reimbursable expenses which cannot be included in the total taxable value of services for levy of servi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

upra.  The relevant portion is reproduced as under:-
“29) In the present case, the aforesaid view gets strengthened from the manner in which the Legislature itself acted. Realising that Section 67, dealing with valuation of taxable services, does not include reimbursable expenses for providing such service, the Legislature amended by Finance Act , 2015 with effect from May 14,2015, whereby Clause (a) which deals with consideration is suitably amended to include reimbursable expenditure or cost incurred by the service provider and charged, in the course of providing or agreeing to provide a taxable service. Thus, only with effect from May 14,2015, by virtue of provisions of Section 67 itself, such reimbursable expenditure or cost would also form part of valuation of taxable services for charging service tax. Though, it was not argued by the learned counsel for the Department that Section 67 is a declaratory provision, nor could it be argued so, as we find that this is a substanti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

and features as also in the implication as to its meaning that arise by presumptions as to the intent of the maker thereof.
28. Of the various rules guiding how a legislation has to be interpreted, one established rule is that unless a contrary intention appears, a legislation is presumed not to be intended to have a retrospective operation. The idea behind the rule is that a current law should govern current activities. Law passed today cannot apply to the events of the past. If we do something today, we do it keeping in view the law of today and in force and not tomorrow's backward adjustment of it. Our belief in the nature of the law is founded on the bedrock that every human being is entitled to arrange his affairs by relying on the existing law and should not find that his plans have been retrospectively upset. This principle of law is known as lex prospicit non respicit: law looks forward not backward. As was observed in Phillips v. Eyre [(1870) LR principle that legislation by

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Solux Galfab (P) Ltd., Shri Anand Singh Baid, Shri Karan Singh Baid and Shri Sidharth Baid Versus Commr. of CGST & CX- Kol. South

M/s. Solux Galfab (P) Ltd., Shri Anand Singh Baid, Shri Karan Singh Baid and Shri Sidharth Baid Versus Commr. of CGST & CX- Kol. South
Central Excise
2018 (7) TMI 516 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI
CESTAT KOLKATA – AT
Dated:- 15-3-2018
Excise Appeal Nos.75064 to 75067/2018 – FO/75837-75840/2018
Central Excise
SHRI P.K. CHOUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Sri B.N. Chattopadhyay, Consultant – FOR APPELLANT(S)
Sri D. Haldar, A.C. (A.R.) – FOR THE RESPONDENT(S)
ORDER
Per P.K. CHOUDHARY
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant company  M/s. Solux Galfab Private Limited is engaged in the manufacture of Tower and Tower components classifiable under Chapter 73 of the CETA.
2. A Show Cause Notice dated 24.12.2014 wa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Adjudication Order. Hence the appellants filed these appeals.
4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records.
5. The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the appellant placed Orders to M/s. DSL for supply of the material. They paid the amount by cheque and received the goods in their factory duly recorded in the Cenvat Account. It is also submitted that the goods were accompanied with Central Excise Invoice indicating Registration Certificate number of M/s. DSL. The Learned Counsel further submitted that it is evident from the records that the Inspector of the Central Excise, Anti Evasion, received the letter dated 07.12.12 of M/s. DSL which would show the existence of M/s. DSL.
6. I find that the depa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Liquidation of pendency of IGST Refund on export on account of various error codes

Liquidation of pendency of IGST Refund on export on account of various error codes
14/2018 Dated:- 15-3-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
CUSTOMS HOUSE, NAVARANGPURA, AHMEDABAD, 380009.
F. No. Vill/48-21 /Cus/Sys/2017-18 Date: 15.03.2018
Public Notice No. 14/2018
SUB:-Liquidation of pendency of IGST Refund on export on account of various error codes
Attention of the Exporters, Customs Brokers and other stake holders is invited to various efforts being made by the Central Board of Excise and Customs to liquidate Pendency in IGST refund claims. In continuation of the same, a Special Drive as "IGST/ITC Exports Refund Fortnight" is being conducted from 15th March to 29th March, 201

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ira Port
Shri B.L. Meena
inbrc6igstrefund@gmail.com
0265-2242160
Surat HiraBourse
Shri Nitin Tagade
inhzaligstrefund@gmail.com
0261-2207685
ICD Tumb
Shri Ghanshyam Soni
inhir6igstrefund@gmail.com
0261-2397659
ICD Valvada
Shri Raghuvansh Kumar
insaj6igstrefund@gmail.com
02632-227154
ICD Valvada
Shri Raghuvansh Kumar
invpi6igstrefund@email.com
02632-227154
Magdalla Port
Shri R.K. Tiwari
inmdaligstrefund@gmail.com
0261-2207685
3. Further Shri Bharat Prakash, Joint Commissioner, Customs, Ahmedabad is nominated as Nodal Officer. His email id is bharat.prakash@icegate.gov.in and contact No. is 079-27543041. Problems being faced while processing of the refund claim may be brought to the notice of nodal officer.
Yours faith

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

IGST (EXPORTS) REFUND FORTNIGHT

IGST (EXPORTS) REFUND FORTNIGHT
14/2018 Dated:- 15-3-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
CUSTOM HOUSE, WILLINGDON ISLAND, COCHIN-682009
F.No.S32/08/2018DBK.Cus
Date: 15.03.2018
Public Notice 14/2018
Subject: Reg.
Attention is brought to the notice of the trade, exporters and all stake holders regarding special measures taken by Central Board of Excise 8v Customs on liquidation of pendency of IGST Refund Claims.
It is seen that about 120 Crores of IGST Refunds of exports through Port of Cochin are pending for clearance. We have noticed that these are pending disbursal due to errors committed by exporters while filing shipping bill

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Formation of IGST Refund Special Refund Cell

Formation of IGST Refund Special Refund Cell
PUBLIC NOTICE NO.13/2018 Dated:- 15-3-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
=============
Document 1
and walk
आयुक्त, सीमा शुल्क का कार्यालय, कांडला
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,
न्यू कस्टम हाउस,
This cl
NEW CUSTOM HOUSE, KANDLA-370 210
Phone No:02836-271468/469, Fax No.02836-271467
F. No. S/20-72/PN/IGST Ref/AG/2017-18
PUBLIC NOTICE NO.13/2018
Dated: 15/03/2018
Subject: – reg.
Attention of all Importers/Exporters, Custom Brokers, Members of
the Trade

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ikas Bagdi
Inspector
9712456270
Document 2
1
Further, Shui U. B. Ralche, Additional Commissioner, Custom House
Kandla Contact No. 09836-271473, e-mail id ubakhepoy.in,
ub.calche@nic.in, is nominated as nodal officer, who can be contacted for
the issues related to IGST Refund.
As a Special drive to clear the pendency of the IGST refunds claims,
the Deputy
Assistant Commissioner (DBK) will hold regular meetings with
trade, at Chamber of Commerce & Industries at Gandhidham.
Purther, Sh. N. R. Meena, Superintendent, contact No. 940845231 Land Sh
Praveen Kumar, Preventive Officer, contact No. 8600832241, would be available at
office of Chamber of Commerce & Industries at Gandhidham, from 16.03.2018 to
collect applications related t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Special Drive as “IGST/ITC Exports Refund Fortnight” conducted to liquidate the pendency of IGST Refund on export on account of various error codes

Special Drive as “IGST/ITC Exports Refund Fortnight” conducted to liquidate the pendency of IGST Refund on export on account of various error codes
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 10/2018 Dated:- 15-3-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS (PREV.), JAMNAGAR
SARDA HOUSE', OPP.PANCHAVATI SOCIETY, BEDI BUNDER ROAD, JAMNAGAR – 361008
F.No.VIII/48-168/Cus-T/2017
Date: 15.03.2018
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 10/2018
Sub: Special Drive as "IGST/ITC Exports Refund Fortnight" conducted to liquidate the pendency of IGST Refund on export on account of various error codes.
Attention of the Exporters, Customs Brokers and other stake holders is invited to various efforts being made by the central Board of Excise & Customs to liquid

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ell -1:
Sr. No.
Name and designation of the (Sh.)
Email Id
mobile No.
1.
H.K. meshram, Assistant Commissioner
cuspipavav@rediffmail.com
9913152508
2.
Pravin Gawande, Superintendent
9925916316
3.
Kamlesh Pandey, Inspector
8000994377
4.
Arvind Kumar Singh, NIC Engineer
9712017557
Special Refund Cell – 2:
Sr. No.
Name and designation of the (Sh.)
Email Id
mobile No.
1.
H.C. Verma, Deputy Commissioner
cuspipavav@rediffmail.com
9723184523
2.
Johny Fernandis, Superintendent
9978200010
3.
Devendra Singh, Inspector
8000708275
4.
Arvind Kumar Singh, NIC Engineer
9712017557
4. In case of any difficulties faced at Special Refund Cells during this special Drive, the exporters / stake holders may contact the below men

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Frequently asked questions (FAQs) related to IGST Refunds

Frequently asked questions (FAQs) related to IGST Refunds
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 12/2018 Dated:- 15-3-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
OFFICE THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (AIR CARGO),
CHENNAI-VII COMMISSIONERATE,
NEW CUSTOM HOUSE, MEENAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI – 600027.
F. No.: S.Misc.09/75/2017- EXP.(Air)
Dated: 15.03.2018
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 12/2018
Subject: Reg.
******
Kind attention of Exporters, Members of Trade, Customs Brokers, Industry Associations and other stake holders are invited to Boards Instructions in F.No.450/119/2017-Cus.IV dated 15.02.2018/ wherein possible issues/errors in Refund of IGST paid on exports is discussed. This office has been continuously receiving representations from exporters and trade association in relation to pending IGST refunds. In order to bring clarity, the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on IGST refund issues are enclosed herewith for the benefit of the Exporters/ Trade a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the CGST Act, 2017; under either of the following options, namely:.
(1) He may supply goods or services or both under bond on letter of undertaking,
subject to such conditions, safeguards and procedure as may be prescribed,
without payment of integrated tax and claim refund of unutilised input tax
credit of CGST, SGST / UTGST and IGST; or
(II) He may supply goods or services or both, subject to such conditions,
safeguards and procedure as may be prescribed, on payment of integrated
tax and claim refund of such tax paid on goods or services or both supplied.
Q3 What is IGST refund?.
Ans. The second category, mentioned above, pertains to refund of integrated tax paid
for the zero-rated supplies made by suppliers who opt for the route of export on
payment of integrated tax and claim refund of such tax paid. There can be two sub-
categories of such suppliers namely:
(i) Exporter of goods
Service exporters and persons making supplies to SEZ
Q.4 Who can get IGST refunds from C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nism to
automatically process and grant refund after validating the shipping bill data available in
ICES against the GST return data transmitted by GSTN. Manual intervention would be
limited to only exceptional cases where automatic validation becomes impossible due
to some technical errors. Such exceptional cases would be only those which would be
approved by the Board and the procedure in those cases would be separately laid out.
Q.7 I have filed my GST returns but still my refund is not sanctioned.
Ans. The IGST refund would not be processed if it fails any validation at the level of
either GSTN or Customs system. Validation errors occur due to various deficiencies,
which are enumerated here-in-after.
Q. 8 What are the reasons for data not being transmitted from GSTN to Customs
'system?
Ans. It has been observed that a number of records have not been transmitted by GSTN
to the Customs system which could be on account of various errors that have occurred
in the validati

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

helpdesk.
Q. 10 How can I find whether my refund data has been successfully transmitted by
GSTN to Customs or not?
Ans. GSTN is reportedly working on a feedback/message system so as to inform the
exporters about such failed validations. At present, the Customs
system. does not have
any information about the reasons for which validation at
GSTN has failed. However, for
all those records which have been successfully transmitted
to Customs system, the
Document 3
report can be generated at the end of field officers. Even the exporter has the option to
check the GST validation status for his shipping bills in his ICEGATE website login for all
records transmitted by GSTN.
Q. 11 I have filed correct information in GST return but still, my refund is not sanctioned.
Ans. In cases where the exporter has filed correct information in the GST returns
and it gets, successfully validated by the GSTN, it is thereafter transmitted
electronically to the Customs system wherein the GST ret

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ch could be a clerical error
made by the exporter at the time of filling of GSTR 1/Table 6A, which can be.
rectified by making amendments in GSTR 1 by using Form 9A. Form 9A has been
made available by GSTN w.e.f. 15.12.2017 in exporter's login at the GST common.
portal.
:
Q. 13 What should be done for error code SB002?
Ans. Exporter has to approach their shipping line/airline/carrier to file the EGM

Document 4
immediately.
Q. 14 What should be done for error code SB0037
Ans. This error occurs when GSTIN declared in the SB does not match with the
GSTIN mentioned in the corresponding GST return. In this case too, the exporter
has to make necessary changes in GSTR 1 by use of amendment Form 9A.
Exporters should note that there is no provision of amendment in the shipping bill
once the EGM is filed.
Q. 15 What should be done for error code SB004?
Ans. This error occurs due to duplicate/repeat transmission of shipping bill
invoice record from GSTN. The previous tran

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST invoice after implementation of GST
since as per the
GST law, IGST is to be paid on the actual transaction value of the supply
between
the exporter and the consignee, which should be the same as
the one declared in
the commercial invoice.
If SB005 is due to a data entry mistake in GSTR 1, it can be amended in Form 9A.
But any mistake in the SB cannot be amended once EGM is filed.
Also, if the
exporter has used a separate invoice in the SB, he cannot
include that in his GSTR
1 in lieu of his GST invoice. Thus, SB005 error, as of now,
cannot be corrected by

Document 5
any amendment either in GSTR 1 or in the shipping bill.
For these cases, a mechanism is being considered by the Board to make the
requisite corrections manually in line with the recent amendments in Rule 96 of the
CGST Rules, 2017. The said mechanism is expected to be available-shortly. It may,
however, be noted that these interim workarounds shall only be available as a one-
time measure for the p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

. This report shows the response/error
code for each of his SBs wherever data has been received from GSTN.
The exporter also has the option to view the SB details relevant for IGST
validation on the ICEGATE website. The exporter can view this while filing the
GST retums and ensure that the details are entered accurately in the returns.
as well so that no mis-match occurs.
+
(II) In case, the exporter's account is not validated by PFMS, he may approach
jurisdictional Customs Commissionerate with correct account details and get
it updated in ICES.
(iv) If the exporter is not getting the refund due to suspension/alert on his IEC, he
may clear his dues or submit e-BRC and have the suspension revoked.
Q. 19. The shipping bill has been transmitted by GSTN to Customs and there is no error
In the refund claim. But still the refund has not been received in the bank account.
Ans. SB000 (Successfully Validated) is the response code which comes when all the
decided parameters like G

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

temporary IGST scroll but
not in the final scroll. This could happen if there is an alert/suspension on the IEC in
ICES or if the account of the IEC is not validated by PFMS.
Q. 20 What is the course of action if there are multiple errors in the refund claim?
Ans. Each such error would be required to be corrected individually in order to get.
refund.
Q. 21 In case of errors, where should I contact for necessary action?
Ans. The following steps could be followed in case of errors in processing of refunds:
When the records have not been transmitted by GSTN to Customs, exporters
may contact GSTN helpdesk.
i)
iii)
iv).
Wherever the error is SB002/SB006, exporter may approach their shipping
line/airline/carrier to file the EGM immediately.
In cases where the temporary scroll is generated but it's not included in the
final scroll, the exporters are advised to furnish correct
bank account details to
the proper officer (Customs field formation) In order to update
the same in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – Refund fortnight from 15th – 29th March, 2018 – IGST Refunds on exports

Customs – Refund fortnight from 15th – 29th March, 2018 – IGST Refunds on exports
PUBLIC NOTICE No. 11/2018-Customs Dated:- 15-3-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTNIVE)
55-17-3, C-14, 2nd Floor, Road No.2, Industrial Estate, Autonagar, Vijayawada – 520007
Phone: 0866-2551261 Fax: 0866-2551156
C. No. VIII/09/01/2017-Cus.Tech.(PF-I)
Date: 15.03.2018
PUBLIC NOTICE No. 11/2018-Customs
Subject : Regarding.
*****
Attention of the trade and all public is invited to this office Public Notice No.09/2018 dated 27.02.2018 communicating guidelines regarding Refund of IGST on exports.
2. The CBEC is observing GST refund fortnight across all its field formations from 15th 29th March, 2018 to deal

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rs/cs-circulars-2018/circ05-2018cs.pdf) communicated vide this office Public Notice No.09/2018-Customs, dated 27.02.2018 (Ref. link : http://www.apcustoms.gov.in/Public%20Notice%20No%2009%200f%202018%
* For rectification of Gateway EGM errors, options have been given to officers at ICD or at the Gateway Port, depending on the error, to make necessary amendments
* Special 'Refund Cells' with dedicated manpower and infrastructure are being operated at all Customs formations during this fortnight for speeding up the sanction of refunds. (Refer this office Public Notice No.09/2018-Customs, dated 27.02.2018)
* Customs have provided the facility on the ICEGATE to check the status of the refund claims. Please log into https://www.ic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Should I surrender my GST account?

Should I surrender my GST account?
Query (Issue) Started By: – Pankaj Garg Dated:- 14-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 21-3-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
I am earning through a website – freelancer.com (Australia based). My entire income is through this website. I don't earn anything with in India Territory.
I was searching on Google if I am liable to GST or not and found an article.
As per this article, I am not liable even to GST but I am already registered and dul

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST CREDIT ON MOBILE AND COMPUTER USE FOR FACTORY OFFICE

GST CREDIT ON MOBILE AND COMPUTER USE FOR FACTORY OFFICE
Query (Issue) Started By: – BHAKTIKANT BHATT Dated:- 14-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 15-3-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
SIR,
WE HAVING A EXCISE ABLE GOODS MANUFACTURING UNIT. NOW WE PURCHASE ONE COMPUTER AND ONE MOBILE FOR FACTORY OFFICE USE.
KINDLY LET ME KNOW WHETHER WE TAKE GST CREDIT ON COMPUTER AND MOBILE WHICH USE FOR FACTORY OFFICE..
PL GIVE US YOUR VALUABLE SUGGESTION.
THANKING YOU
Reply By Alkes

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Registration as deductor separately

Registration as deductor separately
Query (Issue) Started By: – LAKSHMINARAYANAN TR Dated:- 14-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 16-3-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 14 Replies
GST
Dear All
Request your thoughts for one our client who is a Public Sector understaking has GSTIN as Taxpayer already, u/2 52 should they registere again as deductor on top of their GSTIN. Can they use existing GSTIN for both purposes i.e. filing GSTR 7 and 1,2,3? Kindly clairfy.
Have a Nice day
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Separate registration for TCS is not required. Normal GST registration will serve the purpose.An PSU is not fully Govt.
Reply By Alkesh Jani:
The Reply:
Sir, The business vertical as defined under Section 2(18) of the CGST, 2017 is reproduced below:-
(18) “business vertical” means a distinguishable component of an enterprise that is engaged in the supply of individual goods or services or a group of related goods or services which is subject to risks and returns that

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

xpayer) for filing GSTR 7 also or should they go for separate registration. Thanks in advance.
Reply By Alkesh Jani:
The Reply:
Sir, in my point of view you need to go for separate registration as you will not be able to file GSTR-1 and GSTR-7 with same GSTIN.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Is deduction of TCS and TDS under GST Acts a "supply" of Service or Goods ? If not, why separate registrationm necessary ? ITC is to be taken by deductee and not deductor.
Reply By LAKSHMINARAYANAN TR:
The Reply:
Dear Sir
Please refer clause vi and iX under section 24 of CGST Act, where registration as deductor or collector is mandatory in nature. I have the same doubt as Alkesh Jani pointed out that we can't submit both GSTR 1 and GSTR 7 using the same GSTIN. Even though, filing of GSTR 7 suspended for now, I don't think the same is going to be made available on the normal taxpayer's return dashboard. For this purpose separate registration is require on top of dire

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Shri Shukla ji
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Yes Sir I am fully satisfied.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Dear Querist,
Every taxation law is framed to protect revenue. There is no rhyme or reason to frame law for separate registration in respect of deductor of TCS and TDS under GST. Govt.has deferred implementation of TCS and TDS till 30.6.18. There is solid reason behind this. Govt. realizes that it would cause undue harassment to the assessees. Meanwhile, you have golden opportunity to make representation to GST Council for omission of such mandatory provisions in GST laws. De facto, there is no necessity for framing such provisions as revenue can be protected with the already GSTIN of the deductor. As you are well aware GST Acts have been implemented by Govt. in hurry. That is why so many changes/amendments have been made.
So make a representation to the Chairperson, GST Council through your Association of Trade. If you quit now, grievances will not be redressed.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Service Tax and GST onOcean Freight

Service Tax and GST onOcean Freight
Query (Issue) Started By: – Prashant Gupta Dated:- 14-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 18-6-2018 Service Tax
Got 15 Replies
Service Tax
Sir
Recently in my final audit of Excise and Service Tax for pre GST era, I was taxed for Ocean Freight for the period 23rd April 2017 to 30th Juna 2017.
I was aware of notification of 1/2017 & 2/2017 of Service Tax Act but was not aware of notification no 16/2017 which transfers the liability on the Importer.
Not GST is also payable on it on RCM.
I just want to ask that don't you think that this is double taxation.
When we have pade custom duty and Excise/GST on CIF value of our goods imported than why shall we pay again Service Tax/ GST on F part of this CIF value.
Can you please explain the matter.
Reply By rajkumar shukla:
The Reply:
issue is not clear.. which tax was paid on ocean freight?
Reply By CS SANJAY MALHOTRA:
The Reply:
Service tax has to be paid on ocean freight under RCM from April

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

orter.
Reply By CS SANJAY MALHOTRA:
The Reply:
Anything which is subject to RCM can never be treated as Double Taxation. Consider case of domestic supply of Goods, wherein in case of FOR price GST is paid on value of goods which is inclusive of freight.
Furthermore, you pay tax under RCM also on the same freight amount if services taken from transporter. It's actually the transporter liability and the burden to pay has been shifted on recipient as highlighted by Sh. Shukla ji.
The issue of non taxability of ocean freight has already been challenged in High Court as tax as recipient of service is actually the supplier of goods in case of CIF shipments and tax should not be charged.
Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan:
The Reply:
Sir
Whether credit of service tax paid for the period April 2017 to June 2017 under rule 7 CA of Service Tax Rules, 1994 can be availed on or after 1.7.2017 (after introduction of GST)? What is the provision available for availing the credit under CGST

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

cation one can say that an exporter don't have to pay GST on Air & Sea export freight. Earlier GST on Ocean Freight was 5% & Air Freight was 18%
Now enjoy CIF , CFR Shipment without GST . While in case of FOB Shipments the question of GST on Freight does doesn't arise.
Reply By Prashant Gupta:
The Reply:
@Kishan Barai
What is the status for importers importing the material on CIF basis
Reply By Kishan Barai:
The Reply:
For Importers GST on Freight has to be paid.
Reply By Ankit Bansal:
The Reply:
In this case, writ petition has been filled before Hon'ble High Court by M/s Mohit Minerals and which is still pending for final order.
Reply By gstwithtmi tmi:
The Reply:
@prashant: I understand that the service tax audit was conducted at your premises after Jul 2017 and they asked you to pay tax on ocean freight for the period Apr to Jun 2017. Let me know whether they asked you to pay the same as GST or Service tax?
If Service tax, is it possible to claim credit?
Reply

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ct, 1962 ("CA"), includes inter alia the freight element as well; and
(ii) No. 8/2017-IT(R) dated 28.6.2017 which fixes the iGST rates on services including, as indicated against Sl. No. 9(ii) of the table appended to that notification, on Transport of goods in a vessel including services provided or agreed to be provided by a person located in non-taxable territory to a person located in non-taxable territory by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the Customs station of clearance in India.
2. Notably, notification No. 8/2017-IT(R) unambiguously recognizes and provides that though both the provider/supplier and recipient of service, by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the Customs station of clearance in India, may be located in a non-taxable territory, i.e. outside India, the iGST shall nevertheless beleviable on the service.
3. It is relevant to bear in mind here that import of both goods a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ssued under that section.
5. The importers of goods vehemently argue that levy of same tax (iGST) on same service (ocean freight), in the manner elaborated above, amounts to double taxation. Is this argument valid? Is the freight paid on the imported goods indeed subject to double GST levy? These questions naturally throw up following three issues for consideration and determination
A. What is the nature of supply involved here?
B. How is this supply taxable under GST law?
C. Is it indeed subject to double taxation?
But before analyzing and answering these questions, let us understand the meaning of two very pertinent and commonly used terms relating to price of imported goods, viz FOB and CIF.
6. When an importer places an order on an overseas seller for supply of goods, he pays not only the price of goods as such but also the costs and charges incurred to deliver those goods to him in India. These costs and charges inter alia include, where the goods come in a vessel, the insur

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

.
8. The CIF price, on the other hand, generally followed by the name of destination port, e.g. CIF – NhavaSheva, means that the overseas supplier has also paid for both the insurance and freight up to the destination port and is thus entitled to collect from the importer full price of the goods payable for taking the goods to such port. This price equals the FOB price (payable up to the load port) plus freight and insurance from the load port to the destination port. The letter "C", representing cost in the CIF price, is nothing but the FOB price. (Conventionally, all international commercial terms such as FOB, CIF, CFR (cost and freight), EXW (ex-works) etc. are only 3-letter acronyms. Thus, when the price payable is CIF, i.e. FOB + I + F, the 3-letter term "FOB" is replaced by a single letter "C" to make another 3-letter term – CIF). By and large, most of the agreements for import of goods are CIF contracts.
9. Where the price of imported goods payabl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

above, though an importer places an order with his foreign supplier for supply of goods, he ends up paying not only for the goods but also other costs and charges necessary for importing those goods into India. In case of an FOB price, such cost and charges may be attributable to loading of those goods from the supplier's warehouse on to a motor vehicle; transportation from the warehouse to the load port; unloading at the port; and various port services including that required to load the goods on to the vessel. In case of CIF transaction, the services may additionally include freight and insurance payable for transporting those goods from the load port to the destination port.
12. In case of a CIF-based import contract, as already observed, the overseas seller supplies goods as well as associated services including that of transportation of goods by vessel up to the destination port. It is he who receives the shipping service and pays freight charges to the shipping line. It is h

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

gue that, for any supply to be treated as a composite supply u/s2(30), its supplier has to be a taxable person which an overseas supplier may not be. However, it is to be kept in mind that:
(a) S.2(107) of cGST Adefines taxable person as a person who is registered or liable to be registered u/section 22 or section 24 ibid;
(b) a recipient of supply, required to pay tax under reverse charge, is indeed liable to be registered u/s.24(iii)ibid; and
(c) as noted earlier in para 4 supra, an importer of goods or services or both is indeed liable to pay tax under reverse charge.
For the purposes of S. 2(30) of cGSTA, therefore, an importer is indeed a taxable person and a composite supply received by him continues to be a composite supply.
14. As a matter of fact, the S. 14 of CA which deal with valuation of imported goods, treats such a supply,without describing it as such, as nothing but a composite supply. It is because for the purpose of levying Customs duties, ocean freight paid on i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ring, design work, royalties andlicencefees, costs of transportation to the place of importation , insurance, loading, unloading and handling charges to the extent and in the manner specified in the rules made in this behalf: (emphasis supplied)
15. It is also notable that the composite nature of supply of imported goods does not change under the CA even where the supply received is FOB value-based; the importer himself directly receives the service; and pays the ocean freight directly to the shipping line. When it comes to levy of duties of Customs, including iGST, in accordance with the provisions of S.12 CA read with S.3(7) of CTA, the transaction value of goods assessed u/s14 CA read with S.3(8) CTA,in reality, is the transaction value (CIF) of composite supply, with goods being the principal supply.
16. Evidently, therefore, import of goods is considered, under the CA and CTA too, as a composite supply of goods and services for levy of duties of Customs including the iGST u/s 3(

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

h the unambiguous provisions of S.8, at the rate applicable to the goods imported. Any attempt to tax goods and services, which clearly comprise a composite supply, individually will be a clear violation of the provisions of S.8 cGSTA.
C. Double Taxation
19. We have already seen that:
(i) the two notifications, referred to in para 1 supra, prescribe the rates at which various goods and services classified thereunder are to be taxed u/s. 5 of iGSTA;
(ii) Notification No. 10/2017-IT(R) specifies the services in respect of which tax is payable by the recipient under reverse charge; and
(iii) a composite supply of goods or services or both is taxable at a rate applicable to the principal supply.
Now, assume a situation wherein a supplier of goods engages a GTA for moving the goods to a recipient located in another state; pays freight charges to the said GTA; raises an invoice on the recipient for the composite supply of goods and transportation; pays iGST on invoiced value at the rat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ice by the supplier of goods.
20. It is noteworthy that the concept of composite supply and the method of its taxation, enshrined in S.8 of the cGSTA, has been made applicable to iGSTA as well u/s20(ii) ibid. Consequently, any naturally bundled supply of goods and services, comprising a composite supply, can be taxed only in the manner prescribed in S.8 of cGSTA and in no other manner. Splitting and taxing such a bundled supply of goods and ocean freight separately would make the provisions of S.8 otiose.
21. Thus, where an individual supply of goods or services has been taxed as an element of composite supply, it can't be taxed again as goods or service separately. It is true that Notification No.8/2017-IT(R) prescribes a rate of tax on the service of transportation of goods into India by vessel, even where both the supplier and recipient of the service are located outside India. However, it is equally true that under Notification 10/2017-IT(R) dated 28.6.2017 (Sl. No. 10 of the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e provisions of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 on the value as determined under the said Act at the point when duties of customs are levied on the said goods u/section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962. And u/s12 of the CA, duties of Customs are collected at the time when the goods are cleared for home consumption u/s 47 ibid. The iGST is to be levied and collected along with other duties of Customs in accordance with the provisions of sub-sections (7) & (8) of S.3 of CTA which are reproduced below:
(7) Any article which is imported into India shall, in addition, be liable to integrated tax at such rate, not exceeding forty per cent. as is leviable u/section 5 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on a like article on its supply in India, on the value of the imported article as determined u/sub-section (8) .
(8) For the purposes of calculating the integrated tax u/sub-section (7) on any imported article where such tax is leviable at any percentage of its value, the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Ford Business Services Centre Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai, Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai And Vice-Versa

Ford Business Services Centre Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai, Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai And Vice-Versa
Service Tax
2018 (3) TMI 774 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 14-3-2018
ST/41609, 41610, 41611, 41612/2014, ST/Misc/41168/ 2017 & ST/41614/2014, ST/41615/2014, ST/41616/2014, ST/41617/2014, ST/41905/2014, ST/41906/2014, ST/41907/2014, ST/41908/2014, ST/41909/2014, ST/41910/2014 – FINAL ORDER No. 40658-40671 / 2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical)
Shri Rabeen Jayaram, Advocate For the Assessee
Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) For the Revenue
ORDER
Per Bench
The MA filed by Revenue for change of cause title is allowed.
2. The issue arising for consideration in these batch of appeals being same and are arising out of same impugned order, they are heard together and are disposed by this common order. The parties hereinafter are referred

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the refund in respect of other services.
2.1 Today when the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of the assessee, Ld. Counsel Shri Rabeen Jayaram submitted that the period involved in these appeals is prior to 1.4.2011 when the definition of input services had a wide ambit as it included the words activities relating to business . The Event Management service was availed for the promotion of sales of the assessee. Renting of Immovable property service was availed for the purpose of car parking of the employees and management of the company.
Ld. Counsel relied upon the decision in the case of Goodyear India Ltd. Vs CCE Delhi – 2015 (321) ELT 320 (Tri.-Del.) to support his contention.
2.2 The third issue is with regard to rejection of refund in respect of credit availed on debit notes. Ld. Counsel argued that debit notes were issued to supplement the payments made by the service provider subsequently; that such documents are considered to be valid documents for availing credit and h

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

parking was availed for the purpose of giving parking facilities to the employees as well as the management. The denial of credit stating that these services do not have nexus with the output services provided is not justified. We find that the Tribunal in the case of Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. Vs CCE – 2011 (22) STR 289 (Tribunal) has held that prior to 1.4.2011 since the services availed in the course of business of the assessee, the credit is admissible. Following the same, we find that credit availed on these two services are eligible and admissible.
6. The third issue is with regard to credit availed on the debit notes. The Tribunal in the case of Ad-Magnum Packaging Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held that debit notes are valid documents for availing credit provided it contains all requisite information as prescribed in Rule 9 (1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal had relied upon the decision in the case of Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd. Vs Commissioner 2016 (43) STR 124 (Tribunal) wh

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Vajra Rubber Products (P) Ltd. Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, Irinjalakuda, Asst. State Tax Officer And Superintendent of Central Tax & Central Excise, Irinjalakuda

M/s. Vajra Rubber Products (P) Ltd. Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, Irinjalakuda, Asst. State Tax Officer And Superintendent of Central Tax & Central Excise, Irinjalakuda
GST
2018 (3) TMI 972 – KERALA HIGH COURT – [2018] 2 WEB 118 (Ker)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 14-3-2018
W. P. (C) No. 8657 of 2018
GST
MR. P. B. SURESH KUMAR, J.
For The Petitioner : Sri. Harisankar v. Menon, smt.meera v.menon, smt.k.krishna
For The Respondent : Sreelal N. Warrier, SC and Sr. Government Pleader Sri.V.K.Shamsudheen.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks release of the goods detained by the second respondent under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act as also the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act.
2. It is seen tha

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Artech Realtors (P) LTD. Versus Assistant Sales Tax Officer Squad No. 4, Kerala State Goods And Service Tax Department And Assistant Commissioner (Works Contract) State Goods And Service Tax Department Commercial Tax Towers Karamana, Karamana, T

Artech Realtors (P) LTD. Versus Assistant Sales Tax Officer Squad No. 4, Kerala State Goods And Service Tax Department And Assistant Commissioner (Works Contract) State Goods And Service Tax Department Commercial Tax Towers Karamana, Karamana, Thiruvananthapuram
GST
2018 (3) TMI 1019 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 14-3-2018
W. P. (C. ) No. 8580 of 2018
GST
MR. P. B. SURESH KUMAR, J.
For The Petitioner : Sri. K.I. Mayankutty Mather, Sri.R.Jaikrishn

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Subject: IGST Refund Facilitation Camp

Subject: IGST Refund Facilitation Camp
39/2018 Dated:- 14-3-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (NS-II)
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU CUSTOM HOUSE, NHAVA SHEVA,
TAL. URAN, DIST-RAIGAD, MAHARASHTRA – 400 707.
S/12-Gen-790/2017-18 DBK (JNCH)
Date: 14.03.2018
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 39/2018
Subject: IGST Refund Facilitation Camp
All exporters/their agents and all export promotion councils are hereby informed that Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House would organise an 'IGST Refund Facilitation Camp' commencing from 15.03.2018 to 29.03.2018.
2. During this fortnight all shipping bills in respect of which data has been validated by GSTN but refund has not been disbursed due to invoice mismatch error (error code SB005) will be

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. M.H. Industries Versus Assistant State Tax Officer, Palakkad

M/s. M.H. Industries Versus Assistant State Tax Officer, Palakkad
GST
2018 (4) TMI 202 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 14-3-2018
W. P. (C) No. 8708 of 2018
GST
MR. P. B. SURESH KUMAR, J.
For The Petitioner : N. Muraleedharan Nair and Smt. K. Hymavathy, Advs.
For The Respondent : V.K. Shamsudheen, Sr. Govt.Pleader
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks release of the goods detained by the respondent under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Highway Construction Company Versus The Commissioner, Mcgm & 5 Ors.

Highway Construction Company Versus The Commissioner, Mcgm & 5 Ors.
GST
2018 (4) TMI 206 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – TMI
BOMBAY HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 14-3-2018
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 773 OF 2018
GST
A.S.OKA & RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
Mr. A.G. Damle Sr. Counsel a/w Mr Omkar V. Warange for the Petitioner.
Mr. N.V. Walawalkar, Sr. Counsel a/w Ms. Vandana Mahadik & Ms K.H.Mastakar for the Respondent/BMC.
Mr. M.M. Vashi, Sr. Counsel a/w Ms. Aparna Devkar i/b M/s. M.P. Vashi & Associates for Respondent No.5.
Heard the learned senior counsel for the Petitioner, the learned senior counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the learned senior counsel for the Respondent No.5.
2. This Petition concerns e-tender dated 27th July, 2017, for construction of exhibits for Tiger and other animals as well as for Bird Aviary-2 in V.J.B. Udyan- Zoo Byculla (E Ward). The Petitioner as well as fifth and sixth respondents are the bidders. Clause 2 of the Special Note forming part of E-tender

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tes quoted by the fifth respondent for both the parts was Rs. 58,18,69,632/-.
5. The main contention in this Petition is that on the last date for submitting the bids, the rate of GST was 18 %, and therefore, the Petitioner offered his bid by taking into consideration the rate of GST as 18 %. The fifth respondent submitted his bid by taking into consideration the rate of GST at 12 %. That is how the total amount quoted by the said Respondent is on the lower side.
6. The contention of the Petitioner is that by taking GST 18 %, if the bid amounts are calculated, the Petitioner will be L-1. It is contended that, even if the GST is taken at 12 % in case of both the bids, the Petitioner will be L-1.
7. Learned senior counsel for the Petitioner has taken us through the various annexures and the reply filed. It is submitted that even according to the case of the Municipal Corporation, the GST rate was 18 % at the time of submission of the tenders and at the time of opening of the tenders.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

on 10th August, 2017. He placed on record the modified condition in a corrigendum which requires tenderers to quote the amount inclusive of all taxes including GST. He submitted that the Petitioner has signed the said corrigendum. He submitted that the Municipal Corporation has strictly gone by the amounts quoted by the Petitioner itself.
9. Learned senior counsel for fifth Respondent submitted that, by no stretch of imagination, the Petitioner can be L-1. Learned senior counsel for the Petitioner submits that though the memorandum of Petition shows that the Petition was kept ready in February 2018, it is in fact a typing mistake and no significance can be attached to the same.
10. We have considered the submissions. It will be necessary to make a reference to the averments made in the Petition and in particular paragraph 10. From the documents tendered across the bar, it appears that general condition No.38 was modified by the corrigendum dated 10th August, 2017. The learned senior

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t, is that the Petitioner has erroneously calculated GST at the rate of 18 %. The contention is that either the bid amount of the Petitioner be modified by taking the GST at the rate of 12 % or the bid amount of the fifth Respondent be modified by taking GST at the rate of 18 %.
12. Once the tender condition No.2 specifies in what manner the lowest bidder (L-1) will be determined, the Municipal Corporation was under an obligation to determine the lowest bidder only in the manner provided in the tender notice and not in any other manner. Modified condition No.38 specifically provides that the tenderer shall quote inclusive of all taxes including GST. Admittedly the quote by the Petitioner inclusive of GST was higher than the quote of the fifth Respondent.
13. If the submissions made across the bar by the Petitioner are accepted, this Court will have to apply criteria for selecting the lowest bidder which is different from the criteria provided in the tender document/notice. This Court

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commissioner of Central GST pune II Versus ITS Digitech Pvt Ltd.

Commissioner of Central GST pune II Versus ITS Digitech Pvt Ltd.
Service Tax
2018 (4) TMI 1403 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 14-3-2018
ST/88101/2017 – A/85679/2018
Service Tax
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Shri V.R. Reddy, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the appellant
Shri Makrand Joshi, Advocate for the respondent
This appeal is filed by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No: PUN-EXCUS-001-APP-119-17-18 dated 20/06/2017 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune – I.
2. Heard both the sides and perused the records.
3. The issue in this appeal is whether the respondent have filed the refund claims under Rule 5 within the period of one year from the expiry of the quarter for

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

idered as the date of receipt of foreign exchange. While this proposition appears attractive, we are also persuaded to keep in view the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vatika Township (supra), in which the Constitutional Bench has laid down the guideline that any beneficial amendment to the statute may be given benefit retrospectively but any provision imposing burden or liability on the public can be viewed only prospectively. Keeping in view the observations of the Apex Court, we conclude that in respect of export of services, the relevant date for purposes of deciding the time limit for consideration of refund claims under Rule 5 of the CCR may be taken as the end of the quarter in which the FIRC is received,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Marvelous Metals Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central GST Kolhapur

Marvelous Metals Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central GST Kolhapur
Service Tax
2018 (4) TMI 1462 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 14-3-2018
ST/88011 & 88012/2017 – A/ 85673-85674/2018
Service Tax
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Shri V.B. Gaikwad, Advocate for the appellant
Shri Atul Sharma, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the respondent
ORDER
These appeals are directed against Order-in-Appeal No: PUNEXCUS-001-APP-353 & 354/2017-18 dated 14/09/2017 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune – I.
2. Heard both the sides and perused the records.
3. Relevant facts that arise for consideration are during the period October 2012 to March 2015, the appellant herein were required

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ce stands discharged by them by way of adjustment by Revenue authorities against rebate which were sanctioned. It is his submission that in the appeal they are contesting only the imposition of penalties by the lower authorities and upheld by the first appellate authority. He would submit that the service tax liability to be discharged under the reverse charge mechanism by them is available to the appellant as CENVAT credit as the same are used in activities of manufacture of final products. He would submit that the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. Telco Tenneco RC India Pvt. Ltd. [2015 (323) ELT 299 (Mad.)] has held that when revenue neutrality situation arises, the allegation of willful suppres

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

position that the non-payment of service tax cannot be condoned. It is his submission that once there is a demand that is confirmed and the appellant is required to discharge the service tax liability and has not done so due to suppression of facts from the department the tax liability arises along with consequential penalty.
6. On careful consideration of the submissions made, since the appellant is only contesting the imposition of equivalent amount of penalties in this case, this order disposes off the appeals only on that point. I find that the appellant has been taking consistent stand before the lower authorities that even if the service tax liability needs to be discharged they are eligible to avail the same as CENVAT credit as the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Re : M/s. Indo German Brakes (P) Ltd.

In Re : M/s. Indo German Brakes (P) Ltd.
GST
2018 (6) TMI 369 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, UTTARAKHAND – 2018 (14) G. S. T. L. 301 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, UTTARAKHAND – AAR
Dated:- 14-3-2018
Ruling No. 02/2017-18 In Application No. 03/2017-18
GST
MR VIPIN CHANDRA (MEMBER) AND AMIT GUPTA (MEMBER)
For The Applicant : Shri Vipil Dawar
RULING
1. This is an application under Sub-Section (1) of Section 97 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017 and the rules made thereunder filed by M/s Indo German Brakes (P) Ltd) Khasra No. 323Mi, Central Hope Town, Selaqui, Dehradun seeking an advance ruling on classification and rate of applicable GST on “Disc Brake Pads & Brakes Shoes” being used in automobiles.
2. Advance Ruling under GST means a decision provided by the authority or the appellate authority to an applicant on matters or on questions specified in sub section (2) of section 97 or sub section (1) of section 100 in relation to the supply of goods or

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

5. Accordingly opportunity of personal hearing was granted to the applicant and department on 15.02.2018. Shri Vipul Dawar appeared for personal hearing on the appointed date and submitted that before GST regime, they were classifying the said product under chapter 6813 of the Central Excise Tariff but after GST regime advance ruling is requested to clarify whether the product in question is required to be classified under under chapter 68 or 87. No body appeared from the side of Revenue for the hearing.
6. In the present application, applicant has requested for advance ruling on (I) classification of the product and (II) rate of applicable GST on “Disc Brake Pads 85'Brakes Shoes” being used in automobiles. Findings of the authority are as under :
7. “Classification of “Disc Brake Pads & Brakes Shoes” being used in automobiles” : Applicant in their application dated 5.12.2017 has submitted that in the chapter 6813 there is entry which specify that if friction material is not mounted,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

mounted, for brakes, for clutches or the like, with a basis of asbestos, of other mineral substances or of cellulose, whether or not combined with textile or other materials
8708: Parts and accessories of the motor vehicles of headings 8701 to 8705
7.2 Having gone through the aforesaid chapter heads we now proceed to determine the issue in hand.
7.3 Sub-heading 6813 provides for:
“Friction material and articles thereof (for example, sheets, rolls, strips, segments, discs, washers, pads), not mounted, for brakes, for clutches or the like, with a basis of asbestos, of other mineral substances or of cellulose, whether or hot combined with textile or other materials… Other….”
Word “Basis” as mentioned above is not defined in the GST Tariff. In the absence of any guidance in the Explanatory Notes, it is proper to use the principal that tariff terms are construed in accordance with their common and commercial meaning. “Basis” has been defined as follows:
(a) The main constitue

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

al Fibre, Cellulose falls under the category of principle substances constituting most of the inputs. Whereas mineral substances namely Barium Sulphate and Graphite constitutes only a small percentage of the inputs used for making the aforesaid items. Therefore we observe that since mineral substances are not the principal or fundamental substance of Disc Brake Pads^and Shoes and, therefore, do not warrant classification under subheading 6813.
7.5 Further Chapter Heading 8708 covers parts and accessories of motor vehicles of headings 8701 to 8705, provided the parts and accessories fulfil the following conditions:
(i) They must be identifiable as being suitable for use solely or principally with the above-mentioned vehicles;
(ii) They must not be excluded by the provisions of Notes to Chapter 87
(iii) They must not be more specifically included elsewhere in the nomenclature…
7.6 The Disc Brake Pads and Shoes are not excluded by aforesaid Chapter Notes, and are dedicated and u

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

goods in question are referred to in the market by those who deaf with them, be it for the purposes of selling, purchasing or otherwise. In the present case Disc Brake Pads and Shoes are nowhere referred to as the friction material and articles thereof and are known as parts of motor vehicle. Further, Disc Brake Pads and shoes also qualify the test to the effect that they are suitable for use solely or primarily with articles of Chapter Heading Nos. 8701 to 8705; accordingly they are classifiable under chapter heading 8708.'
7.9 Irrespective of aforesaid we also find that products being manufactured by the applicant are meant to be used in' the braking system of vehicles of heading 8701 to 8705 of the Tariff. The parts and accessories of such vehicles are covered in heading 8708 of the Tariff;
(a) The said Chapter 87 falls under Section XVII of the Tariff Section Note 2 to Section XVII (covering Chapter 86 to 89) specifically excludes certain articles from the purview of the expres

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

be suitable for use solely or principally with products of Chapter 86 to 88; and (c) it must not more specifically be covered elsewhere in the Tariff;
(e) As regards to the product in question- “Disk Brake Pads” and “Brake Shoes” for automobiles, it is observed that there seems no dispute as regards to the fact that they are not excluded vide said Section Note 2 of Section XVII and that they are meant solely or principally for use in the braking system of automobiles. The only point of discussion, then, remains as to whether they could be taken out from the purview of Section XVII for the reason that they are more specifically classified elsewhere in the Tariff;
(f) The contesting heading, as stated by the applicant, is 6813 of the Tariff. Chapter 68 falls within Section XIII of the Tariff and this Section does not have any Section Notes. Heading 6813 reads “Friction material and articles thereof (For example, sheets, rolls, strips, segments, discs, washers, pads), not mounted, for

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

different shape and its use no more remain t wide-ranging (as a friction material) but becomes further contoured (such as a brake pad in the instant case). Accordingly, it is observed that “Disk Brake Pads” and “Brake Shoes” which are in form of friction material already mounted on metal plate is not be covered under heading 6813 of the Tariff;
(h) Explanatory Notes to the Harmonized System of Nomenclature, pertaining to heading 6813 of the Tariff too have been perused and give a similar interpretation. The relevant portion reads as follows:-
” … Owing to its high friction coefficient and its resistance to heat and wear, this material is used for lining brake shoes, clutch disc, etc., for vehicles of all kinds, cranes, dredges or other machinery…
 According to the particular use for which it is intended, friction material of this heading may be in the form of sheets, rolls, strips, segments, discs, rings, washers, pads or cut to any other shape…
…..
 The h

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

predetermined ratio to derive the desired friction material in powdered form. Their other main input is a metal sheet designed according to compatibility of the braking system of the vehicle upon which it is to be fitted to. The metal plate is 'shot blasted' to attain the desired surface/strength. The friction material in powder form is poured into a mould/die and along with the metal sheet it is fed into the moulding machine where the powder takes shape of a mould and gets fixed upon the metal plate. This product there after undergoes certain curing and finishing process to attain the desired marketable condition. The product [“disk brakes pads” and “brake shoes” for two/four wheelers] is then packed in retail packs and in secondary packing in which it is cleared from the factory;
(j) In view of the foregoing report, authority observes that the “disk brakes pads” and “brake shoes” are meant for sale in the secondary market i.e. replacement market of various models of vehicles. The

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Re : M/s Kanam Industries

In Re : M/s Kanam Industries
GST
2018 (6) TMI 428 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, UTTARAKHAND – 2018 (14) G. S. T. L. 138 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, UTTARAKHAND – AAR
Dated:- 14-3-2018
Ruling No. 01/2017-2018 In Application No : 02/2017-2018
GST
MR. VIPIN CHANDRA (MEMBER) AND AMIT GUPTA (MEMBER)
For The Present Applicant : Shri Aishwarya Sharma (Advocate)
RULING
1. This is an application under Sub-Section (1) of Section 97 of the CGST/SGST Act,-2017 and the rules made thereunder filed by M/s Kanam Industries, NNIE-II, Mahuakhera Gun]', Kashipur seeking an advance ruling on
(a) What is the interpretation of the term 'three wheeled powered cycle rickshaw' as provided under SI. No. 190 o fthe Schedule 1-to Tariff Notification.
(b) Is there any difference between an electric rickshaw operated by chargeable batteries (E-Rickshaw) and three wheeled, powered cycle rickshaw provided under Tariff Notification
(c) Whether inner tubes of bu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

also submitted by Joint Commissioner, SGST Haldwani in which he reported that the 'three wheeled powered cycle rickshaw' and 'E-Rickshaw' are different and the product namely inner tubes of butyl rubber used in e-rickshaw would fall under HSN Code 4013 and accordingly attracts 18%. duty.
5. Personal hearing was held on 15.2.2018 and Shri Aishwarya Sharma, Advocate appeared for applicant. No body appeared from the side of Revenue for the hearing.
6. In the present application, applicant has requested for advance ruling on interpretation of the term 'three wheeled powered cycle rickshaw' (b) difference between an electric rickshaw operated by chargeable batteries (E-Rickshaw) and three wheeled powered cycle rickshaw, if any and (c) classification of inner tubes of butyl rubber used in e-rickshaw.
7. As per Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28th dune, 2017, three wheeled powered cycle rickshaws are mentioned along with bicycles, rickshaws. The rate schedule is as under:

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

or Vehicle in Motor Vehicle Act also. It has to be registered with State Transport Authorities as a Motor Vehicle. Tyres and Tubes used in these Vehicles are Automobile Tyres and Tubes of size 300-12, 300-14, 90-90/12 and 3.75-12, which are duly prescribed as Automobile Tyres in Bureau of Indian Standards for Two and Three Wheeled Motor Vehicles IS 15627:2005.
9. Authority also observes that SSI exemption notification no. 8/2003- Central Excise dated 1st March, 2003 defines powered cycle rickshaw, as under:
“powered cycle or powered cycle rickshaw means a mechanically propelled cycle or as the case may be mechanically propelled cycle rickshaw, which may also be pedalled if any necessity arises for so doing ”
10. We also observe that the term 'powered cycle rickshaw' in the explanation to the notification number 102/76 dated 16-3-1976 issued under erstwhile Central Excise Act, reads as follows:
“Explanation.- The expression 'Powered Cycle' or 'Powered Cycle Ric

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

dated 6-4-1977.
12. Similar analogy can be drawn in the present case and authority in view of the aforesaid provisions of law comes to the conclusion that Powered Cycle Rickshaw referred to in the Explanation would not cover an Auto Rickshaw and would only cover an ordinary Cycle Rickshaw to which a motor or petrol engine has been fitted.
13. Authority also observes that Three Wheeled Electric Vehicle (E-Rickshaw) is not a Powered Cycle Rickshaw? Because –
(a) It is not a Cycle Rickshaw.
(b) It does not have pedal which is pre-requisite for Powered Cycle Rickshaw and it cannot be peddled, if any necessity arises for so doing.
(c) Itis powered solely by electric motor which is not auxiliary in nature.
(d) It is a motor vehicle under 'Motor Vehicle Act'.
(e) It has to be registered with Local Transport Authority; hence it is a motor vehicle.
14. Therefore, it is concluded that E-rickshaw and powered cycle rickshaw are not one and the same but two different items.
15. From

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =