Goods and Services Tax

M/s. Greenland Traders Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Madurai
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1250 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 19-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/40776/2013 – Final Order No. 40339/2019
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri M.N. Bharathi, Advocate for the Appellant
Ms. T. Usha Devi, DC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
Brief facts are that the appellants are registered for providing service under Manpower Recruitment and Supply agency Service and were supplying manpower to M/s. TATA Coffee Limited and its various units. During the course of audit of the accounts, it was noticed that the appellant had n

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tax liability. Even though the service tax was paid along with interest before issuance of show cause notice, the department has issued show cause notice and confirmed the penalty under sections 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd. – 2012 (26) STR 3 (Kar.) and argued that as per sub-section (3) of Section 73, if service tax along with interest is paid up on being pointed out by the officers, no penalty ought to have been imposed.
3. The ld. AR Ms. T. Usha Devi supported the findings in the impugned order.
4. Heard both sides.
5. The appellant is contesting only the penalt

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Sterlite Industries India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1249 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2019 (25) G. S. T. L. 277 (Tri. – Chennai), [2020] 74 G S.T.R. 473 (CESTAT – Chen)
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 19-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/40042/2013 – Final Order No. 40318 / 2019
Service Tax
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member ( Judicial ) And Hon'ble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member ( Technical )
Shri Vishal Agarwal and Shri Akshit Malhotra, Advocates for the Appellant
Shri A. Cletus, Addl. Commissioner ( AR ) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The appellants are inter alia manufacturers of copper products falling under Chapter 74 of CETA, 1985. Pursuant to audit scrutiny by department officers, it emerged that appellants had received guarantee commission from their associate / subsidiary companies for providing corporate guarantee. It was further noticed that appellants have also paid consideration to M/s. Vedanta Resources Plc.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

terest thereon and penalties were also imposed under sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act. Hence this appeal.
3. When the matter came up for hearing, ld. counsel Shri Vishal Agarwal and Shri Akshit Malhotra appeared and argued on behalf of the appellants. Ld. counsel explained that wherever the appellant was called upon to furnish Corporate Guarantee, they requested their holding company Viz. Vedanta Resources P/c. London to furnish the same. For this, the holding company used to charge the appellant a fee called Guarantee Commission. Similarly, in respect of its associates and subsidiary companies such as Indian Foils Ltd. Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd. etc. wherever these associate enterprises were called upon to furnish Corporate Guarantee for their business, it was the appellant who furnished the same. Till 2006 – 07, the appellant had not recovered any amount from the said associate / subsidiary companies. Even thereafter, they have recovered guarantee commission only from some o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Other Financial Services‟, the levy of service tax cannot be attracted. That adjudicating authority has wrongly interpreted the definition to conclude that since appellant is a company would fit into the definition and as per Section 65(105)(zm) an institution need not be Banking or Non-Banking Financial Institution to fit into this category and need only be a body corporate. That this is completely contrary to the clarification issued by Board in its Circulars.
3.3 The CBEC in their Circulars dated 9.7.2001 and 4.7.2006 has clarified that the expression “any body corporate‟ or “any other person‟ which is referred to in the definition of BOFS has to be read in ejusdem generis with the preceding words. Applying this clarification, it will be evident that what is covered under the scope of “any body corporate‟ is a corporate which is similar to a bank or financial institution. This clarification also brings out that the intention of the Legislature was only to t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

se laws:-
a. Sree Durga Distributors Vs. State of Karnataka – (2007) 4 SCC 476
b. State of Bombay Vs. Bombay Education Society – AIR 1954 SC 561
Providing “corporate guarantee‟ is not one of the itemized service in the definition. Hence, the same cannot be taxed under the head BOFS. Even though the adjudicating authority has admitted that bank guarantee is a guarantee by a bank and a corporate guarantee is a guarantee by the corporate, however, the said authority has still confirmed the demand holding that both guarantees are the same.
3.5 The Tribunal in the case of Banswara Syntex Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2010 (18) STR 68 had clearly laid down that the expression “body corporate‟ referred to in the definition of BOFS covered only such body corporates which are either a banking company or a financial institution or a non-banking financial company. On this settled legal position, the appellant is neither a banking company, a financial institution or even a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

l as for the tax under forward charge, the said situation is clearly revenue neutral one. In reverse charge the tax paid by the appellant would be available for credit to the appellant. The tax paid under forward charge, it is submitted that as a group, the tax paid by appellant would be eligible as credit to the associates / subsidiaries. That being revenue neutral, the invocation of extended period is unsustainable.
3.8 The issue in dispute is clearly one of interpretation and it cannot be concluded that there was willful suppression or fraud on the part of the appellant. Further, when the issue involved is an interpretational one, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked.
3.9 Moreover, time and again, departmental audits were conducted and in none of the audits the department could find any infirmity with non-payment of service tax on the alleged services of issuance of corporate guarantee. Hence invocation of extended period alleging suppression of facts is clearly illegal

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

sued by a bank it is bank guarantee and when issued by a corporate it is corporate guarantee. The functions of both such guarantees are one and the same and therefore providing a corporate guarantee would come within the ambit of providing bank guarantee. The activity of providing a corporate guarantee by the appellant thus falls within the definition of BOFS.
4.1 Countering the argument of the ld. counsel on the reliance placed on the decisions, he submitted that the said decisions do not apply to the facts of the case for the reason that it is not necessary that a corporate body should be a banking company in order to fall within the definition of BOFS. In the present case, undisputedly the appellant is a body corporate and has rendered the activity of issuing a corporate guarantee.
4.2 The ld. AR contended that the taxable service under Section 65(105)(zm) speaks where services to any person inter alia by any body corporate in relation to banking or other financial services. The c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

that service tax will be applicable even to a body corporate.
4.5 He further relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Eicher Motors Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, indore – 2016 (41) STR 721 (Tri. Del.) wherein it was inter alia held that with effect from 16.8.2002, the body corporate would also be liable to service tax for the activity of financial leasing under service tax category of BOFS.
5. Heard both sides.
6. The dispute that comes up for resolution is whether the commission received / paid by the appellant for providing / receiving corporate guarantees (CGs) to/from their associate / subsidiary companies would be exigible to service tax under the category of BOFS for the purpose of Finance Act, 1994.
6.1 For better understanding of the issue, it would be useful to reproduce the definition of BOFS as appearing in Section 65(12) of the Finance Act, 1994.
“Banking and Other Financial Services” means –
(a) the following services provided by a banking

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t, pension fund management, custodial, depository and trust services ,
(vi) advisory and other auxiliary financial services including investment and portfolio research and advice, advice on mergers and acquisitions and advice on corporate restructuring and strategy; (vii) provision and transfer of information and data processing; and
(viii) banker to an issue services; and
(ix) other financial services, namely, lending, issue of pay order, demand draft, cheque, letter of credit and bill of exchange, transfer of money including telegraphic transfer, mail transfer and electronic transfer, providing bank guarantee, overdraft facility, bill discounting facility, safe deposit locker, safe vaults, operation of bank accounts;”;
(b) foreign exchange broking and purchase or sale of foreign currency including money changing provided by a foreign exchange broker or and authorised dealer in foreign exchange or an authorised money changer, other than those covered under sub-clause (a);

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nsive definition and not an inclusive definition.
iii. In Section 65(12)(a), the only persons who have been made liable to service tax under this category are banking company, financial institution (including a non-banking financial company) any other body corporate or a commercial concern.
iv. Further, after listing out the category of persons who would be exigible to tax under the category, the services provided by such persons which alone would be exigible to such taxes have been comprehensively and specifically listed out with the use of the words “namely‟.
6.4 Analysis of the second limb of argument would be sufficient to resolve the issue whether the activity of issuing Corporate Guarantee is taxable under BOFS or not. There is no allegation that the appellant herein has performed any of the category of services listed in Sl. No. (i) to (viii) under section 65(12)(a) ibid. The activity of “providing bank guarantee‟ under section 65(12)(ix) ibid under which head t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, the word 'namely' has been stated as 'that is to say, explicitly, specifically to wit; on item of legislation, namely, certain bail.” In Chambers 21st Century Dictionary the word 'namely' has been stated as “used to introduce an expansion or explanation of what has just been mentioned”. In World Book Dictionary, the word 'namely' has been stated as 'that is to say to wit'. Therefore, the word 'namely', ordinarily imports of what is comprised in the preceding clause; and it ordinarily serves of equating what follows with the clause described before. This Court in State of Bombay Vs. Bombay Education Society reported in AIR 1954 SC 561, had an occasion to examine the meaning of the words 'that is to say' which have been described as 'explanatory or illustrative words and not words either of amplification or limitation”.
Applying the ratio of the aforesaid

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ces dated 22.4.2010 and 19.9.2011.
6.6 From the facts on record, it is evident that the appellants did not provide “bank guarantee‟ to their associate companies in India, neither did they receive any “bank guarantee‟ from parent company abroad. What they provided / received was only a corporate guarantee to /from their associate companies for which exercise they had received / paid guarantee commission. The department has taken the view that Corporate Guarantee and Bank Guarantee are one and the same. We are however unable to agree to this proposition that a corporate guarantee is nothing but bank guarantee by another name. A bank guarantee is given by a bank on behalf of the customer to the beneficiary bank guaranteeing the payment in case of default by customer. A corporate guarantee is a guarantee given by the corporate to cover their own exposure or exposure of some other related entity to their bank. Bank guarantees are issued by Bank on a regular basis as part of the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rantee commission had been received / paid from / to their associate / subsidiary companies for providing / receiving corporate guarantee which in turn was utilized to secure external commercial loans.
6.8 In the event, we do not find much merit in the propositions of Revenue that the guarantee issued by the appellant was only “providing bank guarantee‟ by a body corporate and secondly, the commission received / paid for issue / receipt of such guarantees to / from associate / subsidiary companies are exigible to service tax liability under section 65(12)(a)(ix) of Finance Act, 1994.
6.9 Ld. AR has been at pains to argue that the taxable entry under section 65(105)(zm) ibid also brings within its fold for the purposes of liability to service tax, services provided in relation to bank and other financial services and since the issue of corporate guarantee by the appellants was only to facilitate issue of bank guarantee by the bank, the activity by the appellant is nothing but a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

not come within the fold of section 65(12)(a) ibid and in particular sub-clause (ix) of that provision. The appellant succeeds on merits.
8. The ld. counsel has argued on the grounds of revenue neutrality as well as limitation. The show cause notice dated 22.4.2010, 22.10.2010 and 19.9.2011 have been issued for the periods 2004 – 2011. The appellant has furnished the documents with regard to the audits conducted. The audit report conducted from 18.6.2007 to 29.6.2007 has not raised any objection of non-payment of service tax for providing corporate guarantee. Prior to this an audit was conducted from 19.9.2006 to 21.9.2006 and the report does not show any such objection. All these would go to show that the appellant has not suppressed any facts with intention to evade payment of tax. On such score, the show cause notice issued invoking extended period cannot sustain. The appellant succeeds on limitation also.
9. From the foregoing, we hold that the impugned order requires to be set a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Hindustan Oil Exploration Co. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1248 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2019 (25) G. S. T. L. 252 (Tri. – Chennai)
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 19-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/469/2010 – Final Order No. 40322 / 2019
Service Tax
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Hon'ble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri L. Shibi, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri A. Cletus, Addl. Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The appellant is a private company engaged in exploration of oil and gas onshore and offshore in India and elsewhere and to tap oil and gas reserves and other similar or allied substances. During the course of audit conducted by the officers of internal audit during the month of December 2007, it was revealed that the company is originally based at Baroda and has a separate registration there. After successful exploration at the cauvery basin, they have moved to Ch

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

also. Service tax payable on TDS amount works out to Rs. 5,89,251/-.
1.2 Secondly, it was noticed that while paying service tax, the appellant had not taken into account the expenses incurred by them on behalf of the foreign service provider towards air fare, accommodation and other incidental expenses. As per section 67, the value of taxable services would be the gross amount charged by the service provider and therefore the department was of the view that these amounts are to be included in the gross value. The expenses incurred by the appellant for the period 18.4.2006 to 30.11.2007 was Rs. 66,66,976/- and the liability of service tax on such amount works out to Rs. 8,24,038/-.
1.3 Thirdly, the appellant receives services of Goods Transport Agencies namely M/s. Chandra CFS and Terminal Operators Pvt. Ltd. Chennai. As per Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of Service Tax Rules, in respect of service rendered by GTA, where the consignor or consignee of goods are a company under Companies Act, the reci

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

deduct TDS from the amount paid but pays the deductions to the Government from their own pocket and treats them as expenses. Since the said TDS is borne by the appellant, the demand of service tax on such amount cannot sustain. During the financial year 2006-07 and 2007-08, the company has deposited service tax amounting to Rs. 12,395,886/- and Rs. 11,100,981/- respectively. The company avails of services of various companies / persons, not having any office in India and hence deposits service tax thereon as a recipient of service. The nature of these contracts are (i) where all Indian direct tax are to be borne by the service provider and (ii) where all Indian direct tax are to be borne by the service recipient i.e. the appellant. In the first category, the service provider raises and invoice for the total amount say Rs. 100/-. The company deducts income tax TDS thereon say @4%. The company pays the contractor Rs. 96/- (Rs.100 less Rs. 4 TDS), the income tax department Rs. 4/0 as TDS

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ses is not something which is charged by the service provider. It is a cost incurred by the company by operation of law and is not liable to service tax, as per the current provisions. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Magarpatta Township Development & Construction Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune – 2016 (43) STR 132 (Tri. Mum.).
2.2 The second issue is with regard to non-inclusion of the expenses of air fare, accommodation service and other incidental expenses incurred for the foreign service provider. The ld. counsel submitted that these were not reimbursed by the foreign service provider and being expenses incurred by them for availing the services, these cannot be included in the gross value for discharging service tax.
2.3 With regard to the demand of Rs. 61,500/- under GTA service, he argued that M/s. Chandra CFS and Terminal Operators Pvt. Ltd. is a CFS agent and they have undertaken clearing and forwarding services. Though the tr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nt has furnished documents to show that though TDS amount is deposited the same is borne by the appellant and has not been made part of the consideration. On perusal of documents, we are convinced that TDS has been borne by the appellant. For example, the letter dated 10.5.2006 shows that the appellant has to pay USD 319710 to the foreign company, namely, Thai Nippon Steel Engineering & Construction Corporation Ltd. The said amount has been fully paid as per the foreign certificate remittances. They have not deducted TDS but in fact have discharged the TDS liability. The appellant has borne the same as expenses of their company. On such score, we find that the demand of service tax alleging that TDS has not been included in the gross value is incorrect on facts and cannot sustain. We find that the issue is covered by the decision relied upon by the ld. counsel in the case of Magarpatta Township Development & Construction Co. Ltd. (supra), wherein the facts are as under:-
“3. The lear

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

xed. For this purpose, he relied upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad v. Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust P. Ltd. – 2015 (40) S.T.R. 533 (Tri.-Mumbai).”
The Tribunal in the above decision had set aside the demand. Following the same, the demand under this category requires to be set aside, which we hereby do.
5.2 The second issue is with regard to the non-inclusion of expenses like airfare, accommodation expenses and incidental expenses borne in regard to the service provided by the foreign companies. The plea of the appellant is that these are expenses for the services of foreign personnel and therefore need not be included. Service tax is payable on the gross amount charged as consideration which will include the expenses for rendering service also. The appellant has not been able to establish that these expenses are reimbursable expenses. When the expenses are incurred for providing the services, these are definitely includable in the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. ABI Showatech India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Customs
2019 (2) TMI 1186 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 19-2-2019
Appeal No. E/363/2011 – Final Order No. 40320 / 2019
Customs
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Hon'ble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri S. Murugappan, Advocate for the Appellant
Ms. T. Usha Devi, DC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The facts of the appeal are that the appellants M/s. ABI Showatech India Ltd. are 100% EOU with green card for manufacture and export of precision automotive components, ancillaries, turbo chargers and parts thereof, casting and tools, dies and moulds, jigs and fixtures. The appellants exported some quantity of bearing housings and large quantity of precision automotive components (cylinders). In DTA, they cleared large quantity of bearing housing. On scrutiny of records, it appeared to the department that in terms of para 6.8(a)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nces
DTA clearances as a % of FOB value of exports
25135
7,03,86,720
280035%
209052935
Nil

 
It appeared to the Department that value of DTA clearances of bearing housing machined (parts of turbo charger) is more than the prescribed limit of 90% of the FOB value of exports; that appellant had cleared bearing housing machined into DTA at concessional rate of duties in excess of their entitlement in terms of para 6.8(a) of FTP 2009 – 2014 and in contravention of the conditions stipulated in Sl. No. 3 of Notification 23/2003-CE dated 31.3.2003. Hence, show cause notice was issued to the appellant inter alia proposing differential duty of Rs. 62,51,633/- with interest thereon on the value of clearances of bearing house machined (parts of turbo charger) into DTA for the period from April 2009 to March 2010. In addition, the Commissioner vide the impugned order dated 31.3.2011 confirmed the proposed demand with interest and also imposed penalty under Rule 25(1) of the Central

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

licy. Hence assuming but not admitting there is doubt the matter can be referred to DGFT/Development Commissioner. In this regard, he relied on Greatship (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India reported in 2016 (338) ELT 545 (Del.).
3.5 Even if there is any non-payment, it can be due to interpretation of the policy provisions. Hence, imposition of equal penalty under Rule 25(1) cannot be sustained.
4. On the other hand, ld. AR Ms. T. Usha Devi supports the findings in the impugned order. She pointed out that the appellant have made one export of 50 numbers of bearing house machined for the FOB value of Rs. 25,135/- during the impugned period. Hence accrual of the DTA entitlement that could have happened through the physical exports of the said bearing housing would be only 90% of such FOB value and not the combined FOB value of exports for both the products.
5. Heard both sides.
6.1 The first allegation is that Bearing Housing and Precision Automotive components are not similar goods withi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

omobile components. For appreciation para 6.8(a) of Foreign Trade Policy is reproduced as under:-
Page 25 26
DTA Sale of Finished Products / Rejects / Waste / Scrap / Remnants and by-products
6.8
Entire production of EOU / EHTP / STP / BTP units shall be exported subject to following:-(a) Units, other than gems and jewellery units, may sell goods upto 50% of FOB value of exports, subject to fulfillment of positive NFE, on payment of concessional duties. Within entitlement of DTA sale, unit may sell in DTA, its products similar to goods which are exported or expected to be exported from units. However, units which are manufacturing and exporting more than one product can sell any of these products in to DTA, upto 90% of FOB value of export of the specific products, subject to the condition that total DTA sale does not exceed the overall entitlement of 50% of FOB value of exports for the unit as stipulated above.
6.2 Thus, it can be seen that within entitlement of DTA sale, unit may

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

A. Perumal and Co. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1179 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 19-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/40610/2013 – Final Order No. 40340 / 2019
Service Tax
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Hon'ble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri S. Ramachandran, Consultant for the Appellant
Ms. T. Usha Devi, DC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
Brief facts are that the appellants are holders of service tax registration for rendering services under Manpower Recruitment and Supply service. It was noticed by the department that they provided Manpower Recruitment and Supply Service to M/s. Caltex Gas India (P) Ltd., Madurai, M/s.SPIC, Tuticorin, M/s. TAC Ltd., Tuticorin and M/s. Venus Home Appliances Pvt. Ltd. They did not discharge service tax on the supply of labour to M/s. Caltex Gas India (P) Ltd. They have discharged service tax on the supply of labour to SPIC, Tac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rvice tax for the activity in regard to M/s. Caltex Gas India (P) Ltd. He referred to the work order dated 23.8.2007 as well as to job details and argued that the work order was for filling of cylinders etc. In fact, the nature of work undertaken by the appellant was to do the work of gas filling, manufacture of cylinders etc. and it is not for supply of labour. The department has wrongly interpreted the agreement to conclude that the appellant has supplied labour.
3. The ld. AR Ms. T. Usha Devi supported the findings in the impugned order. She argued that the appellant along with workers had carried out works within the premises of M/s. Caltex Gas India (P) Ltd. and that would show that the appellant has supplied labourer to M/s. Caltex Gas India (P) Ltd. Hence the demand raised under the category of manpower recruitment and supply service is legal and proper.
4. Heard both sides.
5. The issue is whether the activity undertaken by the appellant would fall under the category of Manp

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t specified by CALTEX, on supplier's receipt of a clean work order. A work order must be clean before it is finalized into a firm supply schedule. A clean work order is one where the specifications and commercial requirements are fully defined. SUPPLIER shall immediately notify CALTEX upon its receipt of a work order that is not clean and specify the manner in which is defective. An earlier lead time is acceptable unless otherwise specified in a work order.
3.3.1 CALTEX shall normally pay SUPLIER each undisputed invoice as per the terms specific to the work order released by CALTEX from time to time and mutually agreed upon.”
6. From the above, it can be seen that the work is done as per the work orders issued by M/s. Caltex Gas India (P) Ltd. So also the payment is made in respect of each work order realized by M/s. Caltex Gas India (P) Ltd. from time to time. There is no whisper in the agreement that the payment has to be based on the number of persons or the man hours engaged f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST to Overseas Customer
Query (Issue) Started By: – DIPAK BIJAWE Dated:- 18-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 19-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 1 Reply
GST
Sir,
We are rubber to Metal components manufacturing industry . To manufacture parts we need to develop tool as per the sister company(overseas Customer- UK) specification. Once the tool is developed and after submission of samples approved by customer we used to raise Invoice on overseas customer .
The tool retained by us for

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Relief Granted for CGST and SGST Payments Instead of IGST on Warehoused Goods (July 2017 – March 2018.
Circulars
GST
Relief for tax payment made, as CGST and SGST instead of IGST, for sup

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Omitting Place of Supply in Tax Invoice Violates Rule 46(n) CGST Rules, 2017; Penalties u/ss 122, 125 Possible.
Circulars
GST
Failure to mention Place of Supply in the tax Invoice, in complia

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Penalties for Not Reporting Inter-State Supplies to Unregistered Persons in GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 u/s 125.
Circulars
GST
Failure to mention details of inter-State supplies made to unregistered p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Act Section 17(5)(d): No Input Tax Credit for Construction of Warehouses as Immovable Property.
Case-Laws
GST
Input tax credit (ITC) – The warehouse being constructed is immovable propert

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SCERT's Supply of Printed Educational Books Classified as Principal Supply for Tax Purposes.
Case-Laws
GST
Supply of goods after printing the Syllabus decided by the SCERT – supply of goods i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Plastics Sprayers Fall Under HSN Code 84244100 with 18% Tax Rate Applied.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification of goods – Sprayers made of Plastics – Sprayers are correctly classifiable under the HSN

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Plastic Broomsticks Classified Under Heading 96032900, Subject to 5% Tax Rate.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification of goods – Broom Stick made of plastics – the correct classification of the Plastic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Appeal Dismissed: Advance Ruling on Place of Supply for Global Goods from India Upheld Under GST Laws.
Case-Laws
GST
Place of supply – sourcing (on a worldwide basis)) of goods from India – e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Not Applicable on Unredeemed Payback Points: No Actionable Claim or Service Exists Under Current Regulations.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – actionable claims or not – Even if it is admitted

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pollution Control Device Classified Under GST Chapter Heading 8421, Not as Waste to Energy Plant/Device.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification – the item cannot be called as part of “waste to energy

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Construction and Lease Services Classified as 'Mixed Supply' Under GST; Not Naturally Bundled or Conjointly Supplied.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification of supply – construction and guaranteed lease – since both these services are capable of being provided independent of each other, these cannot be understood to be naturally bundled and supplied conjointly in the ordinary course of business. Therefore, the applicant has/is providing ‘Mixed Supply’
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

TRAN-1_ Submitted & once re amended but one invoice is missed
Query (Issue) Started By: – Prem Choudhary Dated:- 18-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 23-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 8 Replies
GST
Dear Expert
Please advice , whether we have submitted TRAN-1 with due date and also one time has been amended but in claiming of Cenvat one invoice has been missed to claim in TRAN-1.
what are the way of claiming of missed invoice ? whether we can claim through refund ?
Reply By Mahadev R:
The Reply:
Chances are very remote as information is not provided in TRAN-1. One option can be to provide the details in GSTR-3B treating it as other credits as it is the right of the assessee to claim the credit. Otherwise option of refund cou

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ransitional credit should have been taken from GST TRAN-1.
Reply By Prem Choudhary:
The Reply:
Sir
As per judgement of Madras H.C , "Substantive credit can not be denied due to procedure".
TARA Export Vs UOI in W.P. (MD) No. 18532 of 2018, decided on 10-9-2018. = 2018 (9) TMI 1474 – MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
When experts give opinion they do reply as per law. When law is not clear, then we take shelter of case law. There are so many judgements wherein it has been held that substantiative right cannot be denied due to procedural lapse but the department files appeal against such decisions. Every case law has different facts and circumstances. You cannot apply any judgement everywhere. Nobody likes l

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GIST OF RECENT PRONOUNCEMENTS ON GST (PART-XX)
By: – Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 18-2-2019

Goods and Services Tax (GST), introduced from July 1, 2017 is about twenty months old now but has resulted in operational and implementation disruptions affecting all stakeholders. GST law, as drafted and legislated, is not free from the interpretational hassles. GST Council is however, making regular changes to fix the anomalies and hardships faced by taxpayers. 32 meetings of GST Council have been held till 14th February, 2019.
Taxpayers have already challenged various provisions of GST laws and rules framed thereunder with over 300 writs being filed in different courts. High courts and Supreme court have taken a liberal stand so far in view of the fact that law is new and is yet evolving. However, CBIC may move to Supreme court where the verdict is against the Government. In recent past, CBIC had issued directions to be officers to defend the writs

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d High Court granted interim relief to assessee to effect that no coercive steps shall be taken by revenue to recover credit already availed by assessee till next date of hearing. The SLP filed against judgment and order of High Court was dismissed, after allowing for condonation of delay.
* In J K Tyre & Industries Ltd v. GST Council 2018 (5) TMI 457 – MADHYA PRADESH, HIGH COURT , the assessee filed the instant petition seeking direction to respondent to reopen portal immediately enabling assessee to revise its FORM TRAN – 1 and to avail transitional credit, in view of fact that during pendency of petition, Department pointed out that CBDT had issued Circular No. 39/13/2018 – GST dated 3-4-2018 whereby a special cell had been created to resolve assessee's grievances. The Court directed the assessee to avail remedy as was provided vide Circular No.39/13/2018- GST dated 03.04.2018.
* In Vinayaga Roofings v. Assistant State Tax Officer, Kerala 2018 (5) TMI 368 – KERLA HIGH COURT

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

see was registered dealer under the U.P. VAT Act and after the enforcement of the Goods and Services Tax regime with effect from 1-7-2017 made an application for migration to the Goods and Services Tax under the signature of one of its directors and in support of documentation, the PAN card was appended.
The revenue authorities completed the migration process, but during migration recorded incorrect particulars in the registration form of the assessee. To get this rectified, assessee filed the petition. On writ, the assessee contended that despite repeated requests, reminders and also personal meeting with the officials, the error was not being rectified. It also pointed out that the revenue authorities had informed that system of migration had been closed by Goods and Services Tax Network and there was no possibility of generating correct particulars and entering them into the GST portal.
The Court observed that one sees no reason why the authorities were not opening the portal to e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the portal within two weeks from today. In the event they do not do so, they will entertain the GST TRAN-1 of the petitioner manually and pass orders on it after due verification of the credits as claimed by the petitioner. They were also to ensure that the petitioner is allowed to pay its taxes on the regular electronic system also which is being maintained for use of the credit likely to be considered for the petitioner.
* In B.R. Industries v. Union of India 2018 (8) TMI 211 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT where the assessee was unable to file GST TRAN-1 and avail the due credit because of failure of electronic system. Therefore, court directed to reopen GSTN Portal within two weeks and in the event they do not do so, they will entertain the GST TRAN-1 of the petitioner manually and pass orders on it after due verification of the credits as claimed by the petitioner. They were to also ensure that the petitioner is allowed to pay its taxes on the regular electronic system also which is bei

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Kumar Auto Agency Versus The Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Ezhilagam, The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxex Salem And The Nodal Officer of GST Implementation Committee (GIC)
GST
2019 (3) TMI 654 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 18-2-2019
W. P. No. 4137 of 2019
GST
Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth
For the Petitioner : Ms.B.Raveendran
For the Respondent : Mr.M.Hariharan Additional Government Pleader for R1 & R2 No Appearance for R3
ORDER
The Writ Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent, the Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to enable the petitioner to file GST TRAN 1 electronically and treat the same as filed in accordance with law.
2. Heard Mr.B.Raveendran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Hariharan, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents 1 & 2.
There is no representation on behalf of the third respondent.
3. At the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

case to submit their applications seeking rectification of the technical difficulties, such applications to be considered by the appropriate officer within a fixed time frame. In the present case, the petitioner has been approaching the respondent consistently from May 2018 regularly requesting that the situation be set right. The first request was made to the Joint Secretary of Commercial Taxes, Salem, on 03.05.2018.
Pursuant thereto, the 2nd respondent has issued an internal communication to the Input Tax Credit (ITC) section seeking its intervention in the matter. Thereafter, requests were made on 03.05.2018 and 18.05.2018, all of which have been ignored, thus far.
7. The position that a large number of assessees are facing difficulties in accessing the GST website and/or uploading the required Forms is not in dispute. In fact, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes (CBIC) has issued Circular No.39/13/2018 GST dated 03.04.2018 wherein at Paragraph No.8, stating as follows:
8. Reso

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s recorded by the taxpayer in the TRAN-1, which could not be filed. If needed, GSTN may request field formations of Centre and State to collect additional document/ data etc. or verify the same to identify taxpayers who should be allowed this procedure.
8.3 GSTN shall communicate directly with the taxpayers in this regard and submit a final report to GIC about the number of TRAN-1s filed and submitted through this process.
8.4 The taxpayers shall complete the process of filing of TRAN 1 stuck due to IT glitches, as discussed above, by 30thApril 2018 and the process of completing filing of GSTR 3B which could not be filed for such TRAN 1 shall be completed by 31stMay 2018.
8. In the light of the aforesaid and the fair submission of Mr.M. Hariharan before me as recorded in paragraph No.5 of this order, I direct that the technical difficulties faced by the petitioner in uploading GST TRAN I be rectified within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Sri Avinash Aradhya, Sri Mallokaradhya I.P. Versus The Commissioner of Central Tax Bangalore East Commissionerate
GST
2019 (3) TMI 373 – KARNATAKA HIGH COURT – 2019 (23) G. S. T. L. 168 (Kar.) , [2020] 72 G S.T.R. 258 (Kar)
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 18-2-2019
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 497/2019 C/W. CRIMINAL PETITION NO 498/2019
GST
MR. B.A. PATIL J.
Petitioner (By Sri C.V. Nagesh, Senior Counsel for Sri Sandeep Patil, Advocate)
Respondent (By Sri Jeevan J. Neeralgi, Standing Counsel)
O R D E R
These two petitions have been filed by petitioners – accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in O.R.No.40/2018-19 by the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 137 of Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Hereinafter it has been used as 'GST Act' for short).
2. I have heard learned senior counsel Sri C.V. Nagesh for petitioners and learned standing counsel Sri Jeevan J. Neeralgi for respondent an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

or payment of GST and sales tax. It is further alleged that the act is an offence and it is criminal in nature. On the basis of the same, complaint was registered.
5. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that as per the GST Act, maximum punishment which is liable to be imposed even if an offence has been made out and convicted is five years and even as per Section 138 of the GST Act, the said offence is compoundable before the Commissioner on payment. He further submitted that even there is no irregularity no loss of revenue has been caused to the State or Central Government. He further submitted that they have paid the GST by creating invoice. It is further submitted that the accused have not availed any loan or not raised any amount from the bank, even in the input tax, the credit has also been given and that has not been deducted or claimed from the State or Central Government. It is submitted that they are ready to co-operate with the investigation. He further submitted t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

counsel on behalf of the respondent vehemently argued and submitted, if the entire case is looked into without there being any movement of goods, the petitioners have claimed input tax credit and thereby without payment of any tax by them, they claimed input tax credit. In that event the economy of the country is going to be affected. He further submitted that though it is the contention of the petitioner – accused that the input tax credit has been paid, but actually, no tax has been paid to anybody. It is only a paper transaction and it is going to affect the trade transfer of the nation and in the State. He further submitted that it is a scam and if it is allowed to be continued then it will be having its own cumulative effect on the economy as a whole. He further submitted that still investigation is in progress and if the petitioners – accused are released on bail, it is going to affect the entire investigation and they may tamper with the prosecution case. On these grounds, he p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

goods or services or both in violation of the provisions of this Act, or the rules made thereunder leading to wrongful availment or utilisation of input tax credit or refund of tax;
(c) avails input tax credit using such invoice or bill referred to in clause (b);
(d) collects any amount as tax but fails to pay the same to the Government beyond a period of three months from the date on which such payment becomes due;
(e) evades tax, fraudulently avails input tax credit or fraudulently obtains refund and where such offence is not covered under clauses (a) to (d);
(f) falsifies or substitutes financial records or produces fake accounts or documents or furnishes any false information with an intention to evade payment of tax due under this Act;
(g) obstructs or prevents any officer in the discharge of his duties under this Act;
(h) acquires possession of, or in any way concerns himself in transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing, supplying, or purchasing or in a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

f refund wrongly taken exceeds five hundred lakh rupees, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with fine;
(ii) in cases where the amount of tax evaded or the amount of input tax credit wrongly availed or utilized or the amount of refund wrongly taken exceeds two hundred lakh rupees but does not exceed five hundred lakh rupees, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine;
(iii) in the case of any other offence where the amount of tax evaded or the amount of input tax credit wrongly availed or utilized or the amount of refund wrongly taken exceeds one hundred lakh rupees but does not exceed two hundred lakh rupees, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and with fine;
(iv) in cases where he commits or abets the commission of an offence specified in clause (f) or clause (g) or clause (j), he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or with fine or with both.
(2) Where

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ith the previous sanction of the Commissioner.
137. Offences by companies:- (1) Where an offence committed by a person under this Act is a company, every person who, at the time the offence was committed was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any negligence on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
(3) Where an offence under this Act has been committed b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

this section shall apply to –
(a) a person who has been allowed to compound once in respect of any of the offences specified in clauses (a) to (f) of sub-section (1) of section 132 and the offences specified in clause (l) which are relatable to offences specified in clauses (a) to (f) of the said sub-section;
(b) a person who has been allowed to compound once in respect of any offence, other than those in clause (a), under this Act or under the provisions of any State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act or the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act in respect of supplies of value exceeding one crore rupees;
(c) a person who has been accused of committing an offence under this Act which is also an offence under any other law for the time being in force;
(d) a person who has been convicted for an offence under this Act by a court;
(e) a person who has been accused of committing an offence specified in clause (g) or clause (j) or clause (k

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

initiated in respect of the said offence, shall stand abated.
10. By going through the above provision, question which arises before the Court is whether the alleged offences are non cognizable or cognizable. This aspect has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Om Prakash & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr. reported in AIR 2012 SC 545 at paragraph Nos. 24 to 27, it has been held as under:
24. As we have indicated in the first paragraph of this judgment, the question which we are required to answer in this batch of matters relating to the Central Excise Act, 1944, is whether all offences under the said Act are non-cognizable and, if so, whether such offences are bailable? In order to answer the said question, it would be necessary to first of all look into the provisions of the said Act on the said question. Sub-section (1) of Section 9A, which has been extracted hereinbefore, states in completely unambiguous terms that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

plied, an offence in order to be cognizable and bailable would have to be an offence which is punishable with imprisonment for less than three years or with fine only, being the third item under the category of offence indicated in the said Part. An offence punishable with imprisonment for three years and upwards, but not more than seven years, has been shown to be cognizable and non-bailable. If, however, all offences under Section 9 of the 1944 Act are deemed to be non-cognizable, then, in such event, even the second item of offences in Part II could be attracted for the purpose of granting bail since, as indicated above, all offences under Section 9 of the 1944 Act are deemed to be non-cognizable.
25. This leads us to the next question as to meaning of the expression “non-cognizable”.
26. Section 2(i), Cr.P.C. defines a non-cognizable offence”, in respect whereof a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant. The said definition defines the general rule since even un

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

from the normal rule, relate to grave offences which are likely to affect the safety and security of the nation are lead to a consequence which cannot be revoked. One example of such a case would be the evidence of a witness on whose false evidence a person may be sent to the gallows.
27. In our view, the definition of “noncognizable offence” in Section 2(1) of the Code makes it clear that a non-cognizable offence is an offence for which a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant. As we have also noticed hereinbefore, the expression “cognizable offence” in Section 2(c) of the Code means an offence for which a police officer may, in accordance with the First Schedule or under any other law for the time being in force, arrest without warrant. In other words, on a construction of the definitions of the different expressions used in the Code and also in connected enactments in respect of a non-cognizable offence, a police officer, and, in the instant case an Excise Offic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ties involved by the petitioners would have a cumulative effect and if the accused – petitioners are allowed to act in the manner in which they are doing, ultimately economy of the country is going to be affected. In this context no material is produced to show the magnitude of the loss of revenue going to be caused and the manner in which it will affect the economy of the country. But anyhow that is a matter which has to be considered and appreciated only when the entire investigation is completed and full charge sheet is filed.
Now this Court is dealing with only anticipatory bail application, what are the parameters which can be taken into consideration has been elaborately discussed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694. At paragraph- 112 of the said decision, it has been observed as to what are the parameters that can be considered into while dealing with the bail application, which

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

xact role of the accused in the case. The cases in which the accused is implicated with the help of Sections 34 and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 the court should consider with even greater care and caution because over implication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern;
(viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors, namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused;
(ix) The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant;
(x) Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the ac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

STAR SECURITY SERVICES Versus CGST C.E & C. C-BHOPAL
Service Tax
2019 (3) TMI 40 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 18-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/51844/2018-SMC – FINAL ORDER NO. 50273/2019
Service Tax
Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial)
Shri Abhash Mishra, Advocate for the Appellant
Ms Tamana Alam, DR for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Anil Choudhary:
1. Issue involved in this appeal is whether the appellant have rightly taken cenvat credit of Rs. 51,319/- availed on purchase of flat for office purpose for which the sellers/ builders has charged service tax towards construction service of Rs. 51,319/- and have issued receipt dated 29th March, 2014. The said flat has been purchased for office purpos

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

mber, 2016, it was proposed to demand the cenvat credit availed along with interest and penalty, among others.
3. The said demand was confirmed by the adjudicating authority and further confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) observing that the said input service credit is availed by the appellant on construction of new building. As construction service/works contract service have been specifically excluded from the eligible service for cenvat credit, w.e.f. 1st April 2011 the appellant is not entitled to cenvat credit. Accordingly, proportionate penalty was also confirmed which was however maintained at 50 per cent by the commissioner (appeals).
4. Being aggrieved the Ld. Counsel for the appellant states that as the appellant have incurr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Indigra Exports (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Salem
Central Excise
2019 (2) TMI 1295 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 18-2-2019
Appeal Nos. E/40445 & 40446/2016 – Final Order Nos. 40334-40335/2019
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Ms. S. Sridevi, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
Brief facts are that the appellant is an 100% EOU engaged in manufacture of granite slabs. They cleared quantity of 354 Nos. of granite slabs measuring 1230.840 square meter for export in 5 containers under ARE-1 dated 27.11.2007. Out of the 5 containers, the goods contained in 4 containers were duly exported under Shipping Bill dated 28.12.2007 except for a quantity of 48 granite slabs measuring 286.840 square meters. The said container which contained 48 granite slabs were returned to the factory in a ful

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ing that there is no provision for remission of duty once the goods have been cleared from the factory. Aggrieved, the appellant filed appeals before Commissioner (Appeals) who vide orders impugned herein upheld the same. Hence these appeals.
2. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Ms. S. Sridevi submitted that in the instant case, the appellant had cleared the goods under bond for export and only because the vehicle carrying the goods met with an accident the goods got damaged and were brought back into EOU. The goods were never cleared in DTA and therefore the appellants are not liable to pay duty. She submitted that the authorities below have relied upon the decision in Hind Nippon Rural Indus (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2004 (167) ELT 414 (Tri. Bang.) to confirm the duty. However, the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Honest Bio Vet Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2014 (310) ELT 526 (LB) has dealt with the issue as to whether remission of duty is allowable whe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d both sides.
5. The issue is with regard to the demand of duty for the goods that have been damaged enroute and in transit while they were taken out for export. The Tribunal in the case of Tab India Granites (P) Ltd. (supra) had occasion to consider the very same issue and followed the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Honest Bio Vet Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and set aside the demand. The relevant portion is reproduced under:-
“5. It is not disputed that the goods cleared under bond for export were damaged in an accident. The appellant being an EOU is entitled for the benefit of Notification No. 24/2003 dated 31.03.2003, and that the goods have not been cleared in DTA. In the present case, the goods cleared for export got damaged in an accident and it cannot be said that the goods have been cleared in DTA. Further, the Larger Bench decision in the case of Honest Bio-Vet Pvt. Lt. (supra) has held that remission of duty is allowable when goods cleared from the factor

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM Versus M/s. AKSHAYA JEWELLERS
VAT and Sales Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1290 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 18-2-2019
O.T. Rev. No.103 of 2018
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
MR K.VINOD CHANDRAN AND MR ASHOK MENON, JJ.
For The Petitioner : ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For The Respondent : ADVS. SMT.K.KRISHNA SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.C.S.ARUN SHANKAR SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
ORDER
Vinod Chandran,J.
The delay petition is coming up for consideration and the delay is of 647 days.
2. The assessment order was passed on 31.10.2014. An appeal was filed by the assessee, which the first appellate

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

order of the AO, the first appellate authority and the Tribunal. The mistake was only insofar as the TIN number having not been properly quoted by the AO, the first appellate authority and the Tribunal. The AO noticed this mistake and rectified its record on 18.02.2017. The AO also took up proceedings for rectification of the appellate orders. We see that the order of the first appellate authority was sought to be rectified by the AO after one year of his order, by a letter dated 16.03.2018 which was corrected by order dated 03.04.2018 at Annexure-B. There was a subsequent rectification application filed before the Tribunal also, which resulted in the Tribunal also passing a rectified order on 26.06.2018.
4. In fact, the proceedings taken

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Smt. Mallika Jeyabalan, Proprietrix, M/s. Agilam Institute of Foreign Trade Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Madurai
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1247 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 18-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/435/2011 – Final Order No. 40333/2019
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri M. Kannan, Advocate for the Appellant
Ms. T. Usha Devi, DC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The appellants have conducted professional training to individuals in the field of foreign trade for a consideration at Madurai, Coimbatore and Chennai. Department was of the view that the appellant's institute is not a vocational institute

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nann made oral and written submissions which are broadly summarized as under:-
2.1 The appellant has rendered professional training relating to various procedures and statutory compliances to be made in relation to export / import of goods in the field of foreign trade. The training course is designed in such a way that all procedures, statutory requirements, foreign trade policy of the Government, prospective industries and area of export / import etc. are made familiar to the participants.
2.2 In this background, they squarely fall within the definition of vocation training institute in the Explanation (i) of Notification 9/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 and 24/2004-ST dated 10.9.2004 to qualify for exemption from taxability under Commercial T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi
d. 2007 (8) STR 475 (Tri. Bang.) – Wigan & Leigh Collage India Ltd. Vs. CST, Hyderabad.
3. On the other hand, ld. AR Ms. T. Usha Devi supported the findings in the impugned order.
4. Heard both sides.
5. We find that the ld. counsel is correct in his assertion that the ratio of the afore stated decisions would cover when Notification No. 9/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 and 24/2004-ST dated 10.9.2004 were in force. This being so, there cannot be any tax liability for the predominant period of dispute, except for the period between 1.7.2004 and 9.9.2004 under Commercial Training and Coaching service. However, for the period from 1.7.2004 to 9.9.2004, we are of the considered opinion that the matter

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =