Author: admin_gst

Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai West Versus Ugam Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 250 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 19-3-2018
ST/85398, 85407, 85411, 85413/18 – A/86201-86204/2018
Service Tax
Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Shri Dilip Shinde, Asst. Commr (AR) for appellant
Shri Mihir Deshmukh, Advocate, Shri Abhijeet Singh, Advocate for respondent
ORDER
Per: M.V. Ravindran
All these stay petitions are filed by Revenue for staying operations of the impugned order on the ground that refund has been sanctioned by first appellate authority.
2. After hearing both sides, I find that the stay petitions filed by Revenue are devoid of merits accordingly, the stay petitions are disposed of.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Solutions to global organizations. The respondent's global expertise provides clients with specialist knowledge in Multi-country Project Management, International Data Collection and Healthcare Data Solutions using multiple market research platforms and proprietary technologies. Respondent offer a comprehensive range of services that include:-
1. Market Research Operations and Technology related services offering:
(i) language skills across more than 25 international languages,
(ii) expertise across all modes of market research date collection-telephone, internet, mobile and to-face, our strong domain expertise and experience, and track record of proven result.
Respondent provides various kinds of services with the services of single

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

to its clients mainly located outside India i.e. United States of America, United Kingdom and other countries.
6. Adjudicating authority has allowed the refund claims of the respondent partially and partially rejected the same against which an appeal was preferred before the first appellate authority. First appellate authority by following the law settled by Tribunal as also by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola – 2009 (242) ELT 168 (Bom), set aside the impugned order.
7. In the grounds of appeal, Revenue is only stating that post April 2014, the definition of 'input service' has undergone a change which has deleted the services in relation to the business activity and is not to be considered as in or in relatio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Anderson Business Solutions P. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST Bhiwandi, Thane
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 329 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 19-3-2018
ST/85527, 85528, 85530, 85543, 85544/18 – FINAL ORDER NO. A/86195-86199/2018
Service Tax
Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Shri Rajiv Luthia, C.A. for appellant
Shri Atul Sharma, Asst. Commr (AR) for respondent
ORDER
Per: M.V. Ravindran
These five appeals are directed against order-in-appeal No. PK/75-79/Appeal Thane/TH/2017-18 dated 01.11.2017.
2. Heard both sides and perused the records.
3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue is regarding rejection of refund of claim of CENVAT Credit availed where service tax paid on the follo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ceived and utilized by the appellant during the course of rendering output services which are exported. In my view, export of insurance service and the amount involved therein as credit of service tax paid by the service provider of the services would fall under the category of “services” which are used for providing output services by the appellant and exported. To that extent, I rely upon the decision of Robert Bosch Engineering & Business Solutions Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Cus. & ST – 2017 (12) TMI 836 – (Tri.).
6. As regards the service tax credit on the insurance services, maintenance and repair services, I find that the said services in respect of individuals are not allowed accordingly to that extent, impugned orders

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Kanj Products Private Limited
GST
2018 (6) TMI 429 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, UTTARAKHAND – TMI
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, UTTARAKHAND – AAR
Dated:- 19-3-2018
Ruling No. 03/2017-18 In Application No. 04
GST
MR. VIPIN CHANDRA (MEMBER) AND AMIT GUPTA (MEMBER)
For The Applicant : Shri C M Dang
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 Kanj Products Private Limited, Plot No. 71 & 72, Sector 8A, IIE, SIDCUL, Haridwar seeking an advance ruling on applicability of notification dated 5.10.2017 issued by DIPP, Ministry of Commerce and Industry read with CBEC Circular No. 1060/9/2017-Cx. Dated 27th November 2017 in r

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

te 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 services- or both being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant.
3. As per the said subsection (2) of Section 97 of the CGST Act advance ruling can be sought by an applicant in respect of :-
(a) Classification of any-goods or services or both.
(b) Applicability of a notification issued under the provisions of this Act,
(c) Determination of time and value of supply of goods or services or both,
(d) Admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid or deemed to have been paid
(e) Determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or bo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Union of India Versus Kundan Care Products Ltd.
GST
2018 (6) TMI 1477 – SC Order – 2018 (13) G. S. T. L. J94 (SC)
SUPREME COURT – SC
Dated:- 19-3-2018
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 3004 of 2018 with I. A. Nos. 28261 & 28265 of 2018
GST
Mr. Ranjan Gogoi and Mrs. R. Banumathi, JJ.
ORDER
Heard the Learned Counsel for the petitioners and perused the relevant material.
Delay condoned.
Application for exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order is al

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST & C. Ex., Kolkata South
Central Excise
2018 (7) TMI 157 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI
CESTAT KOLKATA – AT
Dated:- 19-3-2018
Ex. Appeal No.75315/18 – FO/A/76034/2018
Central Excise
SHRI P. K. CHOUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Shri H. P. Kanade, Adv. for the Appellant (s)
Shri S. S. Chattopadhyay, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Respondent (s)
ORDER
Per Shri P. K. Choudhary:
This is an appeal filed by the Appellant against the Order-in- Appeal No.93/Kol.V/2017 dated 30.10.2017 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of CGST (Appeals I), C.Ex., Kolkata South.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of soaps and OSAA, glycerine and DFA classifiable under chapters 15, 34 and 38 of the first schedule to CETA. They entered into an agreement with M/s I.M.C. Ltd. with regard to Oil Pipeline Supply Management Services termed as 'Pipeline utilisation charges' to oil tanks. There is a c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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 Credit Rules, 2004. The ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant drew the attention of the Bench to the agreement dated 10 March 2002 between the appellant and M/s IMC Ltd. in respect of transfer of liquid cargo from M/s IMC Ltd.,s terminal. It is seen that there is a clause for pipeline utilisation charges. For the proper appreciation of the case, the relevant portion of the said agreement is reproduced:
“6. The Minimum Guaranteed quantity will be 20000 MT of oil pumped through pipelines (both from Company's terminal/N.S.Dock i.e ex-ship to Party's Factory annum. For any shortfall below 20000 MT per annum “Party” shall pay to “Company” @ Rs. 55/- per MT for such shortfall. After an initial period of 5 years, the amount paya

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

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 CCR, 2004. It is noticed that the service rendered by M/s IMC Ltd. is in respect of manufacturing of excisable goods. Therefore, the denial of credit is not justified.
6. The Tribunal in the case of CCE, Mumbai v. GKW Ltd. [2014 (308) ELT 759 (Tri.-Mum)] observed that excise authorities having jurisdiction over recipient of inputs cannot reopen classification adopted by the officer having jurisdiction over input supplier. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced:
“5. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the Revenue.
5.1 It is true that in the case of Technoweld Industries (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court had held that the process of drawing wires from wire rods not amount to manufactur

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

The Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, GST, Raipur Versus M/s. Balajee Structural (I) Pvt. Ltd,
Central Excise
2018 (11) TMI 1457 – CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT – TMI
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 19-3-2018
TAXC No. 14 of 2018
Central Excise
SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA AND SHRI RAM PRASANNA SHARMA JJ.
For the Appellant:- Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent:- None
Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.
Heard.
1. Mr. Manish Sharma, learned counsel for the Revenue, would raise a ground on the strength of the order passed by the Coordinate Benches of this Court in Union of India Vs M/s Harshad Thermic Industries Pvt. Ltd (TAXC No.48 of 2012) decided on 22.11.2012 and Commissioner, Central Excise Customs &

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

h 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 by the authority while rendering the judgment. However, the present matte is bit different in the sense that the issue as to whether the structural steel items are capital goods or input has already been settled by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in bunch of tax appeals. The lead case being (TAXC No. 59 of 2011) M/s Vandana Global Limited Siltara Industrial Growth Centre Vs Commissioner,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

al (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 structural steel items which were subject matter of decision making by the Division Bench in the matter of Vandana Global (supra) and other connected matters decided by a common order.
5. In view of the above, even though the impugned order is a non speaking order, the core issue having already been settled by this Court in the matter of Vandana Global (supra), we do not consider the present to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund of IGST on Export – EGM Error related cases
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 14/2018 Dated:- 19-3-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
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 variou

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ll be deemed to be an application for refund of integrated tax paid on the goods 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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed at gateway port by the Shipping Lines / Agents; and (c) rectification of errors 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 ca

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Notified Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Third Amendment) Rules, 2018.
G.O.Ms.No.79 Dated:- 18-3-2018 Telangana SGST
GST – States
Telangana SGST
Telangana SGST
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

worker, indicating there in the quantity and description of goods where the goods are sent by one job worker to another or are returned to the principal.";
(ii) in Rule 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), a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rded in writing, refer the matter to the Director General of Safeguards to cause further investigation or inquiry in accordance with the provisions of the Act 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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rate difference Debit Note to Labour Service provider
Query (Issue) Started By: – Nihal Shaikh Dated:- 17-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 19-3-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 20 Replies
GST
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".

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

estricted to the actual tax liability of service supplier.
Reply By Nihal Shaikh:
The Reply:
Sir,
If He 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 s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

recipient is un-registered;
(h) serial number and date of the corresponding tax invoice or, as the case may be, bill of supply;
(i) value of taxable 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 p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ecking GST rates applied to products & for it, ITC could be easily claimed even if excess GST rate applied on a product then market prevailing rate. 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, wh

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Second hand good purchased from ex employer (Bank)
Query (Issue) Started By: – vivin vijay Dated:- 17-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 20-3-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 8 Replies
GST
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)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ar expert, on what will you consider GST if applicable, on the depreciated value which includes 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 Re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ual to the Cenvat Credit taken on the said capital goods reduced by the percentage points 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 val

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Collection of 1% tax on agri items as cess by gari market commitee t
Query (Issue) Started By: – Padmanabham Jaladi Dated:- 17-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 17-3-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 1 Reply
GST
In andhrapradesh agri market committee collecting 1% as agri cess on the goods like ,Tamarind,jaggery
It is right to collect even state compensation act comes i to force
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
In my view, State has power to impose agriculture cess.
Discussion

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax Rate and Policy
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 f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

1% under Composition scheme for manufacturers 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 eac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

vely.
Subsequent to notification of these rates a number 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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxes collected by Service Providers
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 awarene

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Export Refunds
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 o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund of IGST on Export – EGM Error related cases
06/2018 Dated:- 16-3-2018 Circular
Customs
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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

(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.
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 regula

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the gateway port should strictly monitor the EGM pendency and error reports available 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 err

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Mehra Computer Systems Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, The Manager, Corporation Bank, GT-Branch
Central Excise
2018 (3) TMI 1239 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 16-3-2018
W.P.No.4620 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.5695 of 2018
Central Excise
M. Duraiswamy, J.
For the Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthuvenkataraman
For the Respondent : Mr. S. Rajasekar for Mrs.R.Hemalatha
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to call for the records comprising communication dated 26.02.2018 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same consequently direct the 1st respondent to issue a copy of the Order in Original No.86/2016

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, 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 against the Order in Original dated 23.03.2016. On filing of the Appeal, the Appellate Authority shall decide the same on merits and in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of presentation. It is open to the petitioner to seek for appropriate remedy before the Appellate Authority.
5.With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connecte

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Constitution of State Level Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering for The Tamil Nadu under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
G.O. Ms. No. 36 Dated:- 16-3-2018 Tamil Nadu SGST
GST – States
Tamil Nadu SGST
Tamil Nadu SGST
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 p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commissioner of Goods & Service Tax Versus R.D. Magar
Service Tax
2018 (4) TMI 970 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 16-3-2018
ST/85217/2017 – M/85345/2018
Service Tax
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Shri VR. Reddy, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the applicant
None for the respondent/appellant
This application is filed by the Revenue for rectification of mistake in final order No. A/89451/17/SVIB dated 18/08/2017.
2.  Heard the Learned Authorised Representative and perused the records.  by the appellant against order-in-appeal No. NGP/EXCUS/OOO/APPL/ 354/16-17 dated 31/10/2016. The Tribunal in final order dated 18/08/2017 in paragraph No. has recorded that the first appellate autho

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

C.S. Natarajan, Ranjana Bagry, Aruna R. Krishnan and D. Sankar Versus CST Chennai and Principal Commissioner of CGST & CE, Chennai North Commissionerate
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 792 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 253 (Tri. – Chennai)
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 16-3-2018
ST/41005/2013, ST/41061/2013, ST/Misc/41038/2017 & ST/41931/2016, ST/41932/2016, ST/41510/2016, E/41511/2016 – FINAL ORDER No. 40978-40983/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) and Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical)
Ms. P. Syrija, Advocate For the Appellant
Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) For the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The MA filed by Revenue for change of cause title is allowed.
2. The appellants are engaged in running a Spoken English Language Coaching Center along with personality development in the name of “ZEAL”. The department was of the view that the said activity would fall under 'Commercial Coaching or Training Service' and the fees collected from

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

013
July 2009 to Dec 2009
26,254
She submitted that the said course conducted by the appellant falls within the category of 'vocational training' and therefore is eligible for exemption as per Notification No.24/2004-ST. She relied upon the decisions in the case of Mariya Computer Systems (P) Ltd. Vs CCE Bhopal – 2017 (49) STR 539 (Tri-Del) and this Tribunal's Final Order No.40129/2018 dt. 16.01.2018 (Appeal No. ST/302/2010) in the case of Col's Calibre Vs CCE&ST Coimbatore.
4. Ld. A.R Shri S. Govindarajan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that the appellant is conducting merely English speaking course and it does not qualify as 'vocational training course'. He relied upon the case of Ulhas Vasant Bapat Vs CCE Pune – 2015 (37) STR 1034 (Tri.-Mumbai) and submitted that the Tribunal in the said case had held that a English speaking course cannot be considered as vocational training course. It is also pointed out that after 2011, Notification No.DGE & T-19(4)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

cation 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 Act, 1994 (32 of 1994), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the taxable services provided in relation to commercial training or coaching, by, –
(a) a vocational training institute; or
(b) a recreational training institute,
to any person, from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon under section 66 of the said Act.
Explanation.- for the purposes of this notification, –
(i) „vocational training institute‟ means a commercial training or coaching centre which provides vocational training or coaching that impart skills to enable the trainee to seek employment or undertake self-employment, directly after such training or coaching.
……”
7. The Tribunal in the case of Mariya Computer Systems as well as the final order cited supra has analyzed the is

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CGST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate Versus Flextronics Technologies (India) Private Ltd.
Service Tax
2018 (7) TMI 77 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2019 (366) E.L.T. 340 (Tri. – Chennai)
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 16-3-2018
Appeal No.ST/Misc/40794-40796/2017, ST/346, 347 & 350/2012 – 40974-40976/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical)
Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) For the Appellant
Shri Srikanth Balakrishnan, 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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ii) Credits were availed before registration of the premises.
(iii) Credits availed for Rent-a-cab service and outdoor catering services are not eligible for credit since the activities have no nexus with the output service.
(iv) While computing the total turnover, the adjudicating authority added the turnover of the SEZ units also thereby reducing the eligibility of the refund amount.
4.2 He further argued that Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly analyzed the issues as well as the case laws. Following the ratio of those case laws, he granted refund to the respondent.
5. We have gone through the records and heard the submissions made by both sides.
6. With regard to the issue of time bar, Ld. Consultant appearing for the assessee has su

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ndia 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 allowed on services mainly outdoor catering services, Rent-a-cab services, the period involved is prior to 1.4.2011 and the definition of 'input services' during the relevant period had a wide ambit as it included the words “activities rel

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Re: M/s. Fastway Transmissions Pvt. Ltd.,
GST
2018 (7) TMI 1261 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS HARYANA – TMI
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS HARYANA – AAR
Dated:- 16-3-2018
AAR No. HAR/HAAR/R/2017-18/1
GST
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 business of providing cable TV services being a multi system operator (MSG)) and had sought advance ruling on the question:-
'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

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Partly Job Work Process
Query (Issue) Started By: – Basha AbdulRazack Dated:- 15-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 19-3-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 6 Replies
GST
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 1

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

work charges are to be shown accordingly. Please correct me if mistaken.
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 receiv

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

UNABLE TO CHECK STATUS OF IGST REFUND ON ICEGATE SITE
Query (Issue) Started By: – harkirat singh Dated:- 15-3-2018 Last Reply Date:- 27-12-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
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 showing
We have already filed Relevant GSTR return
IGST Validation Details Enquiry
No record found for Given in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

id SB Details
SB002 – EGM not filed
SB003 – GSTIN mismatch
SB004 – Record already received not validated
SB005 – Invalid Invoice Number
SB006 – Gateway EGM not available
Reply By nayan kukadia:
The Reply:
Dear Mr. harkirat singh,
I would like to inform you that many of us have the same issue , i also check in icegate igst validation but it show that No record found for given input , as my CA also don"t know what to do. i also write a email to icegate but they are also mum. if you get any solution plz update us also.
with regards,
kukadia nayan
nayankukadia@yahoo.com
Reply By HIREN KATHROTIA:
The Reply:
I AM ALSO FACING THE SAME PROBLEM OF IGST REFUND, AS IN ICE GATE SITE THERE SHOWS NO RECORD FOUND FOR GIVEN INPUT, P

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Refund Claims for Export of Goods Should Not Require Proof of Realization like BRC/FIRC by Law.
Circulars
GST
Refund of GST – BRC / FIRC for export of goods – insistence on proof of reali

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Exporters Can Claim GST Refunds on Exports Monthly or Quarterly Within the Same Financial Year.
Circulars
GST
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 / quarters. The calendar month(s) / quarter(s) for which refund claim has been filed, however, cannot spread across different financial years.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =