In Re: CMS Info Systems Ltd.,
GST
2018 (8) TMI 977 – APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – 2018 (15) G. S. T. L. 727 (App. A. A. R. – GST), [2019] 71 G S.T.R. 396 (AAAR)
APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – AAAR
Dated:- 6-8-2018
MAH/AAAR/SS-RJ/04/2018-19
GST
SHRI RAJIV JALOTA, AND SMT. SUNGITA SHARMA MEMBER
PROCEEDING
(under section 101 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017)
At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under the MGST Act. Further, the CGST Act, 2017 and MGST Act, 2017, sometimes, shall also be referred as GST Act.
M/s CMS Info Systems Limited (herein after referred to as the “Appellant”) had fi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
llant purchases raw motor vehicles and requisite fabrication, get them converted to cash carry vans. The appellant also pays GST on fabrication. For this purpose, the appellant purchases motor vehicle and pays GST. Credit of GST is not availed by the appellant presently. While purchasing Cash Carry Vans during pre-GST era, the appellant has paid the Central Excise Duty as well as Value added Tax.
3. When these vans cannot be used further, the appellant sells these motor vehicles as scrap. In certain cases, instead of purchasing motor vehicles, the appellant prefers to hire these motor vehicles.
4. The Appellant had approached the Advance Ruling Authority (AAR) for seeking an advance ruling under Section 97(1) of the CGST Act, in respect of the following questions:
I. Whether supply of such motor vehicles as scrap after its usage can be treated as supply in the course or furtherance of business and whether such transaction would attract GST? If yes, please provide the rate of G
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
applicant has not provided any invoice or has informed tariff heading of these goods. Further, it is also not clear whether after sale these would be usable as vehicles or would be fully scrapped. As the said goods do not appear in the notification no. 2/2017-C.T. (Rate) which exempts the goods from the levy of GST, these taxable supply would be taxed at rates mentioned in the Notification No. 1/2017-C.T. (Rate), which may be referred by the applicant accordingly.
6. Regarding the issue raised in the Question II of the application, wherein it was asked that if the sale of the cash carry van, as scrap after its usage, held a taxable supply, whether Input Tax Credit is available to CMS Info Systems Limited on purchase of such motor vehicles i.e. cash carry vans which are used for cash management business and supplied, post usage, as scrap, there was difference in opinion on this particular issue between two members of the Advance Ruling Authority. Therefore, the matter has been referre
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ion (1) of Section 18, input tax credit shall not be available in respect of the following, namely:-
(a) motor vehicles and other conveyance except when they are used-
(i) for making the following taxable supplies, namely:-
(A) further supply of such vehicles or conveyances; or
(B) Transportation of passenger; or
(C) Imparting training on driving, flying, navigating such vehicles or conveyances;
(ii) for transportation of goods;
………………
……………..
9. As per the meaning assigned to “goods” under clause (52) to Section 2 of the CGST Act, money is excluded from the ambit of the “goods”. Section 2(52) is reproduced below:
Section 2. Definition – In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-
(1)………………..
(2)……………….
(52) “goods” means every kind of movable property other than money and securities but includes actionable claims, growing crops, grass and things attached to or forming part of the land which ar
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
order, traveler cheque, money order, postal or electronic remittance or any other instrument recognized by the Reserve Bank of India, only when used as consideration to settle the obligation or exchange with Indian legal tender of another denomination would be considered as “money”.
12. In the instant case, the currency transported by the appellant is for the purpose of carrying out the business of maintaining ATMs by the Appellant and hence, the Appellant are not using the same as a consideration for settling of any obligation. The job assigned to the appellant is for the transportation of currency to the desired destination as per their customer banks and while carrying out the activity of transportation, the said currency is plain goods for the Appellants and cannot be used/is not used in exchange of other Indian legal tender of another denomination.
13. In other words, although in general understanding, what is being transported by the appellants is currency or cash or money, fr
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
(5)(a)(ii) of CGST Act.
16. Section 2 of the CGST Act assigning meanings to various terms used under CGST Act begins with the expression “In this act, unless context otherwise requires”. Normally, the term 'means' makes the definition exhaustive one but such exhaustive definition has to be departed from if the definition section opens with the word “unless context otherwise requires” if there be something in the context to show that the definition could not be applied.
17. In the present case, the context in which the cash carry vans are used for transportation of currency is that the goods of the customer banks are transported by the Appellant and not the money as defined under Section 2 (75) of the CGST Act as the said currency cannot be used as money as understood in the common parlance. Further, the intention of the legislature in excluding money from the definition of “goods” is not to levy CGST on supply of money as otherwise CGST is leviable on supplies of intra- state
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ttached to a motor car or the personal luggage of passengers travelling in the vehicle;
(14) 'goods carriage' means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use solely for the carriage of goods, or any motor vehicle not so constructed or adapted when used for the carriage of goods;
(47) 'transport vehicle' means a public service vehicle, a goods carriage, an educational institutions bus or a private service vehicle;
……………
……………
20. Notification No. 2/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 at Sr. No. 117 provides full exemption for Rupee notes when sold to Reserve Bank of India falling under chapter/heading 48/4907 would also substantiate the Appellants' claim that currency is covered under “goods”.
21. The certificate of registration and also certificate of fitness issued by the Motor Vehicle Department of Govt, of Maharashtra certifying cash carrying vans to be a 'goods carrier' and 'goods vehicle' also support the Ap
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
teena- 2015 (329) ELT 750 (GOI)
25. The Applicant refers to the view expressed by both the Hon'ble Members to the effect that there is no issue of admissibility when the vehicle is carrying bullion. In the present case vehicle is capital goods under Section 2 (19) and hence even if it is used in stray cases in transportation of bullion input tax credit is admissible as there is no bar from taking credit and in any case, the Appellant are not making any exempt supplies.
26. With the above submission and those made in their applications and additional submissions, it is humbly prayed for holding that Appellant are eligible and entitled for input tax credit of GST paid by them to vehicle manufacturers for supply of standard vehicles and GST paid on the fabrication. The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling may also be pleased to hold cash carry vans would be covered under exclusion clause of 17(5)(a)(ii) of CGST.
SUBMISSION MADE BY THE RESPONDENT
27. In response to the above subm
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e banking industry also the money is not goods. Therefore, in the context of the situation in which the appellant is working, 'money' cannot be considered as 'goods'. Accordingly, only because the definition of 'goods' under the CGST Act, 2017, contains the phrase “unless the context otherwise require” does not mean that, the context of the appellant requires a definition of goods is different from one as prescribed in the CGST Act, 2017.
30. The appellant contention that provision of Motor Vehicle Act and the exclusion of money from the scope of e-Way bill should take precedence over the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017, has been made without having any rational or basis. It is emphasized that the CGST Act has provided an unambiguous and clear definition of 'goods'. Therefore, there is no need for resorting to the provisions of Motor Vehicle Act for looking for the meaning of 'goods'. Further, the exclusion of the 'money' from the scope
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ortation of “money” as the transportation of “goods”. Further to substantiate their claim, they also cited court rulings.
33. Countering the arguments made by the Appellant, Shri Anil Kumar, Supdt., the departmental Representative, inter alia, stressed on the definition of 'goods' provided under Section 2(52) of the CGST Act, arguing that the definition of the 'goods' provided in the statute clearly excludes money from its purview, and under no circumstances can be treated as goods. To corroborate their claim, he argued that the cash carry van used for transporting money is not an ordinary vehicle, but a special purpose vehicle, which is deployed for transport of the currency under the supervision of the security guards carrying arms with them and 2 other supervisors as per the guidelines prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India dated 06.04.2018. Thus the money transported by the said special purpose vans, is different from 'goods' defined under the GST law, sin
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ncy that is held for its numismatic value. Since the cash carry vehicles are deployed to carry cash and bullion for other than for numismatic purposes, the cash carried by them is to be construed as money and not goods.
36. It has also come to our notice from the Press Note dated 21st July 2018, available in open source, on the subject of Recommendations made during the 28l meeting of the GST Council held in New Delhi on 21st July, 2018 titled 'Amendments to the CGST Act, 2017, IGST Act, 2017, UTGST Act 2017, and GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017' that the 28th GST Council in their meeting held on 21/07/2018 has inter alia proposed to widen the scope of the ITC to cover the ITC even in respect of motor vehicles used for transportation of money for or by a banking company or financial institution, as quoted below:
PRESS NOTE July 21, 2018
Recommendations made during the 28t meeting of the GST Council held in New Delhi on 21st July, 2018 Amendments to the CGST Act
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
to its employees, under any law for the time being in force……….
This new fact, which has come before us during the course of deciding the instant issue, also needs to be considered solemnly, before concluding our observation in the present case. The fact that the GST Council, the recommendation of which body forms the basis for formulation of the legislature related to GST, has felt the need for widening the scope of ITC by allowing the ITC in respect of motor vehicles used for transportation of money for or by a banking company or financial institution, which were previously not available to them, clearly shows that the intention of the legislature was earlier to not treat 'money' as 'goods', as defined under Section 2(52) of the CGST Act. Now the GST Council have recommended to the Government to lay before the legislature an amendment in the provision which will extend the benefit of ITC in respect of the motor vehicles, used for transportation of money for or
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the latter half of the clause (b) of Section 8(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 will include the “newspaper” even after the amendment of the said act in order to extend the benefit of the concessional rate of Central Sales Tax payable by the publishers on the inter-state purchase of raw materials under the notion that the Appellant cannot be in more unfavorable position as the intention of the legislature was not to increase the tax burden on the printers or publishers of the newspaper. Thus, it has been argued that the Supreme Court had deviated from the plain or literal meaning of the amended definition of the “goods” under the Central Sales Tax Act and has gone on to extract the meaning of the expression of “goods” by following the Golden Rule of interpretation as the literal meaning was leading to the unintended result and absurdity. However, in the instant case, neither had there been any amendment in the GST law nor were there any benefits continuing to the Appellant, which
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ent interpretation of the meaning of goods.
(c) Thomas Cook (India) Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, New Delhi [1994(71) E.L.T. 724 (Tri)].
The cited case is related to the confiscation of the foreign currency exported by post parcels in violation of the provisions and rules prescribed under Customs Act, 1962 and Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. In the instant case, the money, which has been clearly defined in the CGST Act, is being transported by the Appellant at the behest of the Banks under the contracts entered with them. Further, “goods” has also been defined in the CGST Act, which clearly excludes money from its ambit. Thus it is very much clear that the things which are being transported by the Appellant is “money” which cannot be treated as “goods” as explained above.
Therefore, in the instant case, there is no need to derive the interpretation of the “goods” from the Customs Act or Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, when the same is clearly defined under the CGST Act
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, does not include luggage or personal effects carried in a motor car or in a trailer attached to a motor car or the personal luggage of passengers travelling in the vehicle, which does not hold good in terms of the provision made in the CGST Act,2017. Accordingly, reliance placed by the Appellant upon the definition of the “goods” provided under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is not relevant in the instant case. Also, the provisions under the CGST Act being independent and not made referential to the provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act, the clarification under the said act is not germane to the issue.
(f) As regards the reliance placed by the Appellant on Rule 138(14) which carves out goods the transportation of which would not require the preparation of e-way bill, we agree with the view of the Jurisdictional Officer that the exclusion of the 'money' from the scope of the e- way bill has no bearing on the definition of the 'goods' prov
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nterpreted for suiting the requirement of any individual as claimed by the Appellant. If 'Money' is not covered as 'Goods' in the definition of 'Goods' under CGST Act, then it is not 'goods' for everyone and it cannot be said that it is not 'goods' for general perception and it is 'goods' for the Appellant.
The argument of the Appellant that, although in general understanding, what is being transported by the appellants is currency or cash or money, from the Appellant's point of view or for the appellant, what is transported is 'goods' and not 'money', does not support their cause, as the definitions provided in Acts are universal and same cannot be interpreted for suiting the requirement of any individual as claimed by the Appellant. If 'Money' is not covered as 'Goods' in the definition of 'Goods' under CGST Act, then it is not 'goods' for everyone and it cannot be said that it is not
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =