RECENT NOTIFICATIONS ON ‘IGST’ RATE

RECENT NOTIFICATIONS ON ‘IGST’ RATE
By: – DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 19-1-2019

The Central Government issued seven notifications on IGST rate consequent the decisions taken by the GST Council. These notifications came into effect from 01.01.2019.
Notification No. 25/2018-Integrated Tax (Rate)
Vide Notification No.01/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 notified 6 types of rates as detailed below-
* 5 per cent. in respect of goods specified in Schedule I,
* 12 per cent. in respect of goods specified in Schedule II,
* 18 per cent. in respect of goods specified in Schedule III,
* 28 per cent. in respect of goods specified in Schedule IV,
* 3 per cent. in respect of goods specified in Schedule V, and
* 0.25 per cent. in respect of goods specified in Schedule VI.
This Notification brings amendment to the first schedules in Notification No.01/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate).
Amendments in Schedule I – 5%
* This Noti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the purposes of this entry shall be deemed as 70% of the gross consideration charged for all such supplies, and the remaining 30% of the gross consideration charged shall be deemed as value of the said taxable service.
* Sl. No. 234A is renumbered as 234B and a new entry 234A is inserted as detailed below-
* 234A – 871420 –
Amendments in Schedule II -12%
* After sl. No. 101, the sl. Nos. 101A, 101B and 101C are inserted as detailed below-
* 101A – 4502 00 00 – Natural cork, debacked or roughly squared, or in rectangular (including square) blocks, plates, sheets or strip (including sharp-edged blanks for corks or
* 101B – 4503 – Articles of natural cork such as Corks and Stoppers, Shuttlecock cork bottom
* 101C – 4504 – Agglomerated cork (with or without a binding substance) and articles of agglomerated cork
* This Notification omitted the entries No. 102 and 126.
* 102 – 4501 –
* 126 – 4904 00 00 – Music, printed or in manuscript, whether or not bound or illustrated

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ngs (including universal joints)” are substituted.
* A new entry 376AA is inserted after the entry 376A.The details of the new entry are as follows-
* 376AA – 8507 – Lithium-ion accumulators (other than battery) including lithium-ion power bank”
* Against S. No. 383, in the entry in column (3), after the words “television cameras”, the words, “digital cameras and video camera recorders”, are inserted.
* Against S. No. 384, in the entry in column (3), for the figures and word “20 inches”, the figures and word “32 inches” shall be substituted.
* Sl. No. 440A is renumbered as 440B and the new entry for 440A is inserted as detailed below-
* 440A – 9504 – Video game consoles and machines, articles of funfair, table or parlour games, including pintables, billiards, special tables for casino games and automatic bowling alley equipment [other than playing cards, ganjifa card, chess board, carom board and other board games of 9504 90 90 like ludo, etc.
Amendments in Schedule IV -28

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d accessories of vehicles of heading 8711.
Notification No. 26/2018-Integrated Tax (Rate)
Notification No.02/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 granted exemption to certain supplies. The present Notification substituted entries for the entries 43A, 43B and inserted entries 121A and 153. The new substituted and inserted entries are as follows-
Sl.No.
Chapter/Heading/Sub-heading/Tariff item
Description of Goods
43A
0710
Vegetables (uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water), frozen
43B
0711
Vegetables provisionally preserved (for example, by sulphur dioxide gas, in brine, in sulphur water or in other preservative solutions), but unsuitable in that state for immediate consumption.
121A
4904 00 00
Music, printed or in manuscript, whether or not bound or illustrated
153
Any Chapter
Supply of gift items received by the President, Prime Minister, Governor or Chief Minister of any State or Union territory, or any public servant, by way of public auction by t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

with Handbook of Procedures;
* the recipient shall export the jewellery made out of such gold within a period of 90 (ninety) days from the date of supply of gold to such recipient and shall provide copy of shipping bill or bill of export containing details of Goods and Services Tax Identification Number (GSTIN) along with the invoice for exports to the Nominated Agency within a period of 120 (one hundred and twenty) days from the date of supply by the Nominated Agency;
* wherever such proof of export is not produced within the period mentioned in condition (ii), the Nominated Agency shall pay the amount of integrated tax payable on the quantity of gold not exported, along with interest from the date when the said tax on such supply was payable, but for the exemption.
Notification No. 28/2018-Integrated Tax (Rate)
Notification No. 08/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 prescribes the IGST tax rates on services. The present notification brings the following amendments to t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

than (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), and (vi) above – 18%
* Sl.No. 17 of the table deals with the Heading 9973 (
* (viia) Leasing or renting of goods – Same rate of integrated tax as applicable on supply of like goods involving transfer of title in goods
* (viii) Leasing or rental services, with or without operator, other than (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), (vi), (vii) and (viia) above- 18%;
* This Notification substituted tax rate as 12%(18%) for item No. (iv) of 34.After amendment the revised entry is as below-
(ii) Services by way of admission exhibition of cinematograph films where price of admission ticket is one hundred rupees or less. – 12%
* This Notification inserted entry No. 38 as detailed below-
Sl.No.
Chapter, Section or Heading
Description of Service
Rate (per cent.)
Condition
38
9954 or 9983 or 9987
Service by way of construction or engineering or installation or other technical services, provided in relation of setting up of following, –
(a) Bio-gas plant

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

fication No. 29/2018-Integrated Tax (Rate)
This Notification amended the Notification No. 09/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 in which the Central Government exempted the inter-State supply of services of description as specified in column (3) of the Table given in the Notification from so much of the Integrated Tax leviable thereon under sub-section (1) of section 5 of the said Act, as is in excess of the said tax calculated at the rate as specified in the corresponding entry in column (4) of the said Table, unless specified otherwise, subject to the relevant conditions as specified in the corresponding entry in column (5) of the said Table.
The following are the amendments brought out in Notification No.09/2017-Integrated tax-
* The present Notification inserted item No. 22B, 28A and 77Aas detailed below-
Sl.No
Chapter, Section, Heading, Group or Service Code (Tariff)
Description of Services
Rate (per cent.)
Condition
22B
Heading 9965 or Heading 9967
Services

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y or an entity registered under section 12AA of the Income tax Act, 1961.
NIL
NIL
* Entry No. 35A indicates -Services supplied by Central Government, State Government, Union territory to their undertakings or Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) by way of guaranteeing the loans taken by such undertakings or PSUs from the financial institutions.
The present Notification inserted the words 'banking companies and' after the words 'PSU from the'.
* This notification substitutes the Heading for the entry No. 69 – 9992.The newly substituted headings are 'Heading 9992 or Heading 9963'.
* This notification omitted serial No. 70 and the entries relating thereto. The entry 70 deals with the Services provided by the Indian Institutes of Management, as per the guidelines of the Central Government, to their students, by way of the following educational programmes, except Executive Development Programme.
* Para 2 of the Notification No. 09/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) gives definition for vari

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ation inserted a proviso after the item No. 2(g) which provides that nothing contained in this entry shall apply to services provided by a goods transport agency, by way of transport of goods in a goods carriage by road, to, –
* a Department or Establishment of the Central Government or State Government or Union territory; or
* Local Authority; or
* Government Agencies,
which has taken registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 only for the purpose of deducting tax under section 51 and not for making a taxable supply of goods or services.
* This Notification inserted 3 entries from 14 to 16 as detailed below
Sl.No.
Category of Supply of Services
Supplier of service
Recipient of Service
Services provided by business facilitator (BF) to a banking company
Business facilitator (BF)
A banking company, located in the taxable territory
Services provided by an agent of business correspondent (BC) to business correspondent (BC)
An agent of business corresp

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Amendment in Notification No. F.I-11(91)-TAX/GST/2017(Part) dated the 9th November, 2017

Amendment in Notification No. F.I-11(91)-TAX/GST/2017(Part) dated the 9th November, 2017
F.1-11(91)-TAX/GST/2018(Part II) Dated:- 19-1-2019 Tripura SGST
GST – States
Tripura SGST
Tripura SGST
GOVERNMENT OF TRIPURA
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
(TAXES & EXCISE)
NO. F.I-11(91)-TAX/GST/2018(Part II)
Dated, Agartala, the 19th January, 2019
NOTIFICATION
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 147 of the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Tripura Act No. 9 of 2017), the State Government, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby makes the following amendment in the notification of the Government of Tripura in the Finance Department No. F.I-11(91)-TAX/GST/2017(Part) dated the 9th November, 2017 published in the T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax Invoice for supply of goods and service

Tax Invoice for supply of goods and service
Query (Issue) Started By: – Kaustubh Karandikar Dated:- 18-1-2019 Last Reply Date:- 19-1-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
XYZ (Manufacturer) is making and supplying “Hanging Banner Assembly” attracting 18% GST. In the same invoice he is also charging separately, installation charges, freight charges and scaffolding charges and charging same GST rate i.e. 18%. Is it the correct way of issuing the invoice or for installati

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

job work pre gst period

job work pre gst period
Query (Issue) Started By: – Madhavan iyengar Dated:- 18-1-2019 Last Reply Date:- 20-1-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
Where material was sent out for job work by A in pre gst period to B the job worker and scrap is generated at B job workers end in GST period
Now during Dec 18 A has raised a debit note on B in GST period for scrap with out any taxes
kindly clarify the treatment to be given by A
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
A is

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Credit of GST paid on Hotel Bill (Inter State / Intra State)

Credit of GST paid on Hotel Bill (Inter State / Intra State)
Query (Issue) Started By: – ACCOUNTS MANAGER Dated:- 18-1-2019 Last Reply Date:- 20-1-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Hi….
My query is regarding availment of GST paid on Hotel Bill situated outside the sate. Because they charge
CGST+SGST instead of IGST. Also we are not able to view credit on portal in our GSTR-2A.
Also in case of Hotel bill of Intra state in that case also we are not able to view credit in our GSTR-2A.
Hence, from above for which credit we are eligible and if not then why???
Regards,
Devendra
Reply By Ramaswamy S:
The Reply:
The hotel has charged correctly. The place of supply is within the state for the Hotel.
The hot

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commission and Shipping charges on exempted goods

Commission and Shipping charges on exempted goods
Query (Issue) Started By: – Satya Sharma Dated:- 18-1-2019 Last Reply Date:- 19-1-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
I need to know if ITC can be claimed on commission and shipping charged on supply of exempted goods. To be specific, Amazon is online selling our exempted goods and charging their commission and shipping fee being delivered to all over India, can we claim GST charged on commission and shipping fee provided we have monthly invoice from Amazon for Commission and Shipping Fee.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
You have Tax Invoice from Amazon. You can claim ITC on account of GST paid on the amount of commission paid for the supply of exempted good

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

How to claim refund for reverse ITC in import

How to claim refund for reverse ITC in import
Query (Issue) Started By: – aayushi singhal Dated:- 18-1-2019 Last Reply Date:- 23-1-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 8 Replies
GST
As per the prevalent practise, customs duty along with IGST is paid by the importer himself at the time of importing the goods. The procedure for filing refund application requires the importer to enter the Purchase details in the Excel Utility. However, the said Utility mandatorily requires the GSTIN of the Supplier, obtaining which is not possible in case of import since the Supplier is a foreign entity and as such there is no mechanism for establishing nexus between the customs EDI and GSTN.
Further, in the absence of any provision for filing r

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ble to claim refund ITC.
Reply By aayushi singhal:
The Reply:
A company X is getting imported certain hardware from country Y. At the time of importation, X is paying custom duty along with IGST. After importation, X in the capacity of Supplier is supplying the hardware to Research Organization (along with other customers) at the rate of 5% GST. Since the Input is greater than output rate, X is eligible for ITC refund. At the time of filing for online refund application, the excel utility requires X to enter GSTN number of the Supplier, which cannot be obtained for imports since the taxes are paid to customs, because of which the application does not get completed and hence fails to submit.
On the contrary, if X tries to get the same t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tour Operators GST Rate

Tour Operators GST Rate
Query (Issue) Started By: – JIGAR SHAH Dated:- 18-1-2019 Last Reply Date:- 18-6-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Our client is into the business of tour operators. His total tour operating income is say ₹ 40 lakhs and total tour cost is say ₹ 35 lakhs. Is he allowed to charge GST @18% on the profit i.e. 18% on 5 lakhs (40-35)?
Another scenario is, is it allowed to charge 18% on total tour operating income i.e. 18% on 40 lakhs, along with Input tax credit (like GST paid on Hotel booking, transportation cost)?
Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan:
The Reply:
Sir,
According to Para 2 (zzm) of Notification No.12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 [with effect from 01.07.20

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t charged in the bill is the gross amount charged for such a tour including the charges of accommodation and transportation required for such a tour.
If service provided is only for hotel booking and of hotel charges are recovered separately on actual basis, then GST will be payable @18% treating such service as suppport service of tour operator service.
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani:
The Reply:
GST@5% on tour operator service is applicable provided that credit of input tax charged on goods and services used in supplying the tour operator service, other than the input tax credit of input service in the same line of business (i.e. tour operator service procured from another tour operator)] has not been taken & the bill issued for supply of th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Joint Development Agreement GST rate

Joint Development Agreement GST rate
Query (Issue) Started By: – JIGAR SHAH Dated:- 18-1-2019 Last Reply Date:- 11-5-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
A developer has entered into a joint development agreement with the land owner. As per the agreement the developer has the right to sell the developed land into plots to the final customer. The developer receives the total sale consideration and out of that he gives the agreed proportionate land cost on sales conside

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pathology laboratory service provided by doctor is exempted or not?

Pathology laboratory service provided by doctor is exempted or not?
Query (Issue) Started By: – KANUBHAI PATEL Dated:- 18-1-2019 Last Reply Date:- 19-1-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
Pathology laboratory service provided by doctor to its individual customers is exempted or not?
Reply By Alkesh Jani:
The Reply:
Sir,
In terms of Sl. No.74 Notification No.12/2017 dated 28.06.2017 (as amended from time to time) "(a) health care services by a clinical establi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Mode of Delivery of Show Cause Notice

Mode of Delivery of Show Cause Notice
By: – CA Akash Phophalia
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 18-1-2019

Introduction
Concept of show-cause notice finds its roots in the birth of laws. The system of issuing show-cause notice is prevailing in all the legal frameworks throughout the world in the same manner or the other following the principle of natural justice. The importance of delivery of show-cause notice is equally important. In this article the author aims to highlight the importance of proper mode of servicing of show cause notice through a recent decision held by Allahabad high Court in the case of Kashi Bartan Bhandar v State of UP 2018 (11) TMI 556 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Meaning of Show-cause notice
Show cause notice means an order issued by a Court, Competent Authorities or an Organization asking an individual or a group of people to explain or to "show cause" in writing as to why the disciplinary action should not be taken against the indiv

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

or a tax practitioner holding authority to appear in the proceedings on behalf of the taxable person or to a person regularly employed by him in connection with the business, or to any adult member of family residing with the taxable person; or
(b) by registered post or speed post or courier with acknowledgement due, to the person for whom it is intended or his authorised representative, if any, at his last known place of business or residence; or
(c) by sending a communication to his e-mail address provided at the time of registration or as amended from time to time; or
(d) by making it available on the common portal; or
(e) by publication in a newspaper circulating in the locality in which the taxable person or the person to whom it is issued is last known to have resided, carried on business or personally worked for gain; or (f) if none of the modes aforesaid is practicable, by affixing it in some conspicuous place at his last known place of business or residence and if

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ause notice was served by the proper officer through affixation. But, there was nothing on record that had been brought to notice to establish the time, date and place and the manner in which service by affixation was resorted to.
Discussion and Findings
The notice under the Act is required to be served in accordance with the provisions of Section 169 of the Act which provides that it can be served by giving or tendering it directly or by messenger to the person concerned or to a person regularly employed by him in connection with his business or to an adult member of the family residing with him; or by registered or speed post or courier with acknowledgement due by sending at the last known place of business or residence of the person concerned; or by sending a communication at its email address provided at the time of registration and amended from time to time; or by making it available on the common portal; or by publication in a newspaper circulating in the locality in which the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Draft audit programme for GST Audit

Draft audit programme for GST Audit
By: – Rajagopalan TS
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 18-1-2019

AUDIT PROGRAM FOR GST AUDIT
1 Preliminary
* Check GST registration certificate
* Cross check the name of the entity with PAN or Company incorporation certificate
* Check for single registration or multiple registration – ask for documentation
* Name board to contain GST registration
* Ask client to log on to GST portal and verify whether it is active still
2 Transition
* Verify the June 2017 returns of Service tax, Excise and VAT
* Take stock of the closing balances as per those returns
* Verify whether it is reflecting in the Trans 1 statement
* Verify the documentation for Trans 1 filing with the department
* Correspondence with department on Trans 1 credit disallowance if any (specifically ask for it and record)
* Capital goods credit balance 50% under Excise and 1/3rd or 2/3 rd under VAT should be verified
* How Cess is handled in the tr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

* Check the 3B return status in the portal, submitted or filed status
* Check the GST portal for any queries raised by the department on line and what action taken by the client
4 GSTR1
* Whether GSTR1 has been filed for all months – July 2017 to date
* Verify the physical copy with the portal numbers for correct upload of data
* Check all the returns for correct filling of all the columns, IGST not updated as local and vice versa
* Verify how the purchases from unregistered dealers handled
* Verify how the SEZ or Export transactions are reported
* Cross verify the rate of tax applied with the tariff headings
* State code – whether correctly filled up
* On a random basis check the GST registration of customers in the portal for correctness of the same
* Check the status of the return – Submitted or filed
* Open the dash board and verify whether all the returns are appearing in the portal
* How the data is extracted from the company's books – manually or downloa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r private software used – if private software used then carefully check whether all transactions are uploaded properly in the portal
* The liability quantified in GSTR 1 – local and IGST must match with the liability quantified in GSTR 3B
* Cut off procedure – last document no. for each month as per books accounts and first document no. for the next month – take for Aug 2017, Nov 2017, Jan 2018 and March 2018.
* Check whether Tally is closed each month and verify the same for three months during the period of audit
* In case of SAP please verifiy whether period closing is done and ask the concern to open the system and show that the period closure is done. Take a screen shot for our records
5 Input credits
* Verify the input credit disclosed in GSTR 3B under CGST, SGST and IGST
* Verify whether the same reflects in company's books of account and matches
* If there is difference record the same and ask for explanations
* If rectified subsequently document the same – to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t entail credit availment unless he provides GST invoice
* Import IGST will be eligible for credit and verify the same with Bill of entries
* Take a listing of vendors of the client with GST nos and check whether client has such a list and updation frequency to be verified
* How does the client verify whether the vendors have filed their GSTR 1 returns – Process to verify and document
* For those not filing the returns what steps the company takes to ensure that they file and the credit availed is legal and correct
* Is there any check for ensuring the vendors making GST payments on monthly basis – If so record the same
* Rejection of materials – How handled in GST – Whether the client raises the rejection debit note with GST and reverses the credit or not
* In the alternative for full rejection of invoice client need not avail credit and also raise debit note for rejection. In this case the transportation of materials could be a problem and how handled – verify this
*

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s NORTH WESTERN CARRYING CORPORATION, NIKUNJ BHARAT KASERA Versus UNION OF INDIA

M/s NORTH WESTERN CARRYING CORPORATION, NIKUNJ BHARAT KASERA Versus UNION OF INDIA
GST
2019 (2) TMI 1083 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT – TMI
GUJARAT HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 18-1-2019
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 496 of 2019
GST
MS HARSHA DEVANI AND DR A. P. THAKER, JJ.
For The Petitioner (s) : MR ANAND NAINAWATI (5970)
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
1. Mr. Anand Nainawati, learned advocate for the petitioner, inter alia, submitted that the impugned s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Island Aviation India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai

M/s. Island Aviation India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 678 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 18-1-2019
Appeal Nos. ST/706 & 707/2012 – Final Order Nos. 40156-40157/2019
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri V.S. Manoj, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, ADC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The appellants are functioning as General Sales Agent of Malaysian Airlines in the territory of South India for cargo transportation and other services provided by Malaysian Airlines. They are registered with the Service Tax Department. During the course of audit of accounts, it was noticed that the appellant had entered in a General Sales Agency Agreement (Cargo) with Malaysian Airlines Systems, Berhad on 30.3.2007 for functioning as General Sales Agent for cargo transportation and other services pro

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

les Agent. The appellant has discharged the service tax on the entire commission received by them as General Sales Agent. This agreement between the parties also provide for a specific arrangement wherein the appellant is entitled to purchase cargo slot at the rater specified / agreed and make profit from sale of such cargo space to exporter. He submitted that the agreement specifically provides that when there is a purchase and sale, the appellant is not entitled for any commission. In the present proceedings, the demand is not raised on the commission received by the appellant as General Sales Agent. The demand is confined to the amount calculated as a difference between the purchase price and sale price of the cargo space. In such purchase of cargo space, the appellant is not acting in the capacity of a General Sales Agent for Malaysian Airlines and therefore is not receiving any commission from them. In fact, it is only a specific arrangement whereby the appellant is entitled to pu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

slot from the Malaysian Airlines and not as General Sales Agent. He adverted to the annexure to the show cause notice and argued that the annexure would show that the alleged amount of taxable value is arrived by department only from the difference of the sale price and purchase price of the cargo slot. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand observing that the issuance of the airway bill by the appellant indicates that there is no trade of cargo space. In fact, the adjudicating authority has not considered the specific arrangement that the appellant is responsible to make payment of freight irrespective whether customer makes the payment. In such specific arrangement, the appellant may make profit or sell the slot at a price less than the purchase price which may result in loss to the appellant. In any case the price received by the appellant is only trading profit and not commission. The issuance of the House Airway Bill by the appellant will also prove that the transaction

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e where Malaysian Airlines and the appellant have prior specific rate arrangements, the appellant who is a general sales agent is not entitled to any commission. It is clear from the above clauses that the appellant is rendering services as air cargo agent of Malaysian Airlines. It is also clear from the said clauses that income is received by the appellant from Malaysian Airlines in the form of commission at the rate of 5% of IATA published rates or in the form of difference between the rates specified by Malaysian Airlines and the rates collected from the shipper / customer. Thus, the consideration is termed in a different manner and it is actually a commission received by the appellant.
4. Heard both sides.
5.1 The service tax demand is raised under BAS. The appellant has countered the allegations in the show cause notice stating that they are engaged not only as general sales agent but also receive income in the form of trading of cargo space. For whatever commission received as

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

gent is not entitled to any commission.”
6. As per clause 9, it is seen that the Malaysian Airlines and the appellant has some arrangement with regard to the rates of the cargo slots which can be sold by the appellant. For slots, for which there is specific rate arrangement between the parties, the appellant is not entitled to any commission. Thus, the appellant purchases the cargo slots and thereafter sells the same to customer / exporters. The difference between sale price and the purchase price of the cargo slot is sought to be brought within the ambit of commission by the department. In such transaction, it is specifically stated in clause 9 that the appellant is not entitled to commission. In fact, for transactions as a General Sales Agent, the appellant is entitled to commission as per IATA regulations. In other transaction of sale of cargo space of specific agreed rates, it is not specified that appellant is eligible for any consideration. This means the appellant can sell suc

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Shailendra Eat Udyog Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others

M/s Shailendra Eat Udyog Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others
GST
2019 (1) TMI 1418 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 18-1-2019
Writ Tax No. – 1712 of 2018
GST
Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
For the Petitioner : Digvijay Tiwari
For the Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Admittedly, the period of limitation to file a first appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 is three months and the period for which the delay may be condoned is thirty days from the expiry of normal period of limitation. Clearly, no application for condonation of delay may have been entertained by the appellate authori

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Full Bench decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax I; Commissioner of Income Tax Central; Janpad Thok Kendriya Upbhokta Sahkari Bhandar Limited Vs. Mohd Farooq; New Cawnpore Floor Mills Pvt Ltd; Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 2009 (317) ITR 305, the delay condonation application filed beyond the period of thirty days could not be condoned and it was clearly not maintainable by the appellate authority.
6. Consequently, there is no error in the order of the appellate authority dismissing the appeal as time barred.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner then submitted that if the remedy of appeal is held to be non-existant, still jurisdiction of the writ Court against the original order dated 03.12.2018 may not be ousted.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Shanti Eat Udyog Surir Kala Tehsil Mant District Mathura Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others

M/s Shanti Eat Udyog Surir Kala Tehsil Mant District Mathura Versus State Of U.P. And 3 Others
GST
2019 (1) TMI 1347 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 18-1-2019
Writ Tax No. – 1711 of 2018
GST
Saumitra Dayal Singh, J.
For the Petitioner : Digvijay Tiwari
For the Respondent :  C.S.C.
ORDER
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Admittedly, the period of limitation to file a first appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 is three months and the period for which the delay may be condoned is thirty days from the expiry of normal period of limitation. Clearly, no application for condonation of delay may have been entertained by the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

o. 8 as also the Full Bench decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax I; Commissioner of Income Tax Central; Janpad Thok Kendriya Upbhokta Sahkari Bhandar Limited Vs. Mohd Farooq; New Cawnpore Floor Mills Pvt Ltd; Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 2009 (317) ITR 305, the delay condonation application filed beyond the period of thirty days could not be condoned and it was clearly not maintainable by the appellate authority.
6. Consequently, there is no error in the order of the appellate authority dismissing the appeal as time barred.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner then submitted that if the remedy of appeal is held to be non-existant, still jurisdiction of the writ Court against the original order dated 03.12.2018 m

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Fertin Pharma Research & Development Versus Commissioner of CGST, Navi Mumbai

Fertin Pharma Research & Development Versus Commissioner of CGST, Navi Mumbai
Service Tax
2019 (1) TMI 1043 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 18-1-2019
APPEAL NO: ST/87376/2018 – A/85131/2019
Service Tax
Shri Ajay Sharma, Member (Judicial)
Appellant: Shri D.H. Nadkarni, Advocate
Respondent: Shri S.B. Mane, Assistant Commissioner (A.R.)
ORDER
The present appeal has been filed from the impugned order dated 18.04.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals), Raigad, by which the ld. Commissioner rejected the appeal filed by the appellant and held that technical testing and analysis services provided by the appellant cannot be termed as export of service and therefore refund claim of unutilized Cenvat credit of Rs. 4,31,384/- under Rule 5 of CCR, utilized in respect of this service for the period from January 2016 to March 2016 is not admissible.
2. The brief facts of the Appeal are that the Appellant is engaged in the activity of res

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for Rs. 4,31,384/-, but the same was rejected by both the authorities below on the ground that technical testing and analysis services provided by the Appellant cannot be termed as export of service.
3. The Learned Authorised Representative on behalf of revenue reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of the appeal filed by the appellant. The ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellants submitted that in Appellants' own case on similar facts, for the period from April, 2013 to June, 2013 this Tribunal has allowed the Appeal filed by the Appellant, which is tilted as M/s Fertin Pharma Research & Development vs. Commissioner of S.T., Mumbai-VII reported in 2017(6) GST 475(T). I have gone through the same and find the same to be on the identical issue. The relevant extract of the said decision is as under:
” xxx
xxx
xxx
3. After careful consideration of the facts of the case and the submissions of both sides, it ap

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

also i.e. from January, 2014 to December, 2015 this Tribunal in another decision in Appellants' own case involving identical issue vide order no. A/87552-87557/2018 dated 28.09.2018, titled as Fertin Pharma Research & Development Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of CGST, Navi Mumbai decided the issue in favour of the Appellant. He also produced the copy of the said order for my perusal. While going through the same, I find that the aforesaid decision also squarely covers the issue involved in the present appeal. The relevant extract of the said order is as under:
” xxx
xxx
xxx.
6. Heard both sides and perused the records. Undisputedly, the appellant had purchased the goods from the overseas company, on which they discharged appropriate customs duty on its import into India. Necessary tests are carried out by them on the said goods in India and after analysis the relevant report was submitted to the overseas Denmark company. In the process of providing the said output service, that is, “Te

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nd decisions that exports are not taxable and, with the most palpable manifestation of export of invisibles being the receipt of convertible foreign exchange from a recipient of service located outside the country, that services are taxable at the destination, the scope of Rule 4 must necessarily be scrutinized to ascertain if there was, indeed, legislative intent to deny acknowledgement as exporter to a certain category of service providers that were so privileged tell them. There is no dispute that the recipient of service is located outside India and that the consideration is received in foreign convertible currency. Yet, Revenue insists that performance of service is in India. A service is not necessarily a single, discrete, identifiable activity; on the contrary, it is a series of invisibles that cater to the needs of a recipient; it is upon the consumption of the service by the recipient that service is deemed to have become taxable. This has been so held by the Hon'ble Supreme C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e which is possessed by the recipient. Hence, even if some of the activities are carried out in India, by no stretch can it be asserted that the fulfilment of the activity is in India. Therefore, the inescapable conclusion is that the location of the actual performance of the service is outside India and, even with the special and specific provision of Rule 4 of Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012, the performance of service being rendered outside India would render it to be an export.
14. In this context, the legislative intent of incorporating a special and specific provision in Rule 4 may yield further insights. The special provision, which may be seen as an exception to the general Rule 3, deals with services in respect of goods as well as those provided to individuals. Not unnaturally, the services that require the physical presence of the person is taxed where the consumer receives the service and not at his location which as per Rule 2(i)(iv) would be his usual place of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hat have been framed by the Central Government make it absolutely clear that taxable service provided from outside India is liable to service-tax. In the example given by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, there is no question on the service of haircut having been received in India.'
The intent in Rule 4 to remedy out some specific situations that would, otherwise, have enabled escapement from tax or leviability to tax where Rule 3 of Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012 may not serve to confer jurisdiction becomes increasingly obvious.
15.Accordingly, we can infer that the location of performance of service in respect of goods is not an abstract, absolute expression for fastening tax liability on services that involve goods in some way; for that, Rule 3 would have sufficed. A contingency that is not amenable to Rule 3 has been foreseen and remedied by Rule 4 and in the process, the sovereign jurisdiction to tax is asseted. It is, therefore, not by the specific word or p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n goods, Rule 4(1) of Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012 would appear, by elimination of possibilities, to relate to goods that require some activity to be performed without altering its form. The exemplification in the Education Guide referred supra renders it pellucid. Certification is an important facet of trade and such certification, if undertaken in India, will not be able to escape tax by reference to location of the entity which entrusted the activity to the service provider in India. This is merely one situation but it should suffice for us to enunciate that Rule 4(1) is intended to resorted when services are rendered on goods without altering its form that in which it was made available to the service provider. This is the harmonious construct that can be placed on the applicability of Rule 4 in the context of tax on services and the general principle that taxes are not exported with services or goods.
17. The goods supplied to the respondent, minor though the propo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

said case, the Place of Provision of Service Rules,2012 was not considered. This Tribunal while interpreting the provisions of new Rules, that is, Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012 followed the ratio laid down in the said case in reiterating the basic principle of levy of service tax and observed that it is a consumption-based levy, accordingly, the technical and consultancy service, commences from the stage of undertaking the test on the goods procured and the service is completed on delivery of the test report/certificate to the overseas client. I do not find any reason to deviate from the aforesaid observation of this Tribunal. Further, the judgements referred by the learned A.R for the revenue, in my opinion, are not relevant to the facts of the present case, inasmuch as in the said judgement the issue raised was levy of service tax on procurement of FDA certificate for the goods to be sold in the respective country. In the result, following the aforesaid precedent, I do n

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED Versus CGST-DELHI III

DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED Versus CGST-DELHI III
Service Tax
2019 (1) TMI 979 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – 2019 (24) G. S. T. L. 37 (Tri. – Del.) , [2019] 68 G S.T.R. 313 (CESTAT – New Delhi)
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 18-1-2019
Appeal No. ST/52815/2016-CUS [DB] – FINAL ORDER NO. 50064/2019
Service Tax
Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Shri C.L. Mahar, Member (Technical)
Shri Somesh Arora, A.S. Hasija, Advocate for the Appellants
Shri Amresh Jain, AR for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Anil Choudhary:
1. The issue in this Appeal is whether service tax have rightly been levied on 'Development Fee', collected by the appellant, from the passengers at IGI Airport.
2. M/s Delhi International Airport Limited w.e.f 10.04.2017 (hereinafter Appellant) has filed the present appeal against the Order-In-Original No. DLI-SVTAX-003-COM-56-15-16 dated 12.07.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi-III (Adjudicating Authority). Vide the impugned order

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ting, upgrading, modernizing, financing and managing IGI Airport and to perform services and activities constituting Aeronautical and Non-Aeronautical services (excluding the Reserved Activities) at the IGI Airport.
4. As per the OMDA the appellant has been granted the exclusive right in respect of IGI Airport inter alia to develop, finance, design, construct, modernize, operate, maintain, use and regulate the use by third parties of the airport and to enjoy complete and uninterrupted possession and control of the airport site and the existing assets for a period of 30 years (with an option to extend it by another 30 years).
5. As per the terms of OMDA, the appellant was granted the right to determine, demand, collect, retain and appropriate charges from the users of Airport which will be in the nature of aeronautical charges, charges for non-aeronautical services and Passenger Service Fee. The aeronautical charges are levied by the appellant at IGI Airport for provision of Aeronauti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he “ad hoc” approval granted was subject to submission of final project cost estimates. The said approval; for levy of DF was allowed based on appellant's request to bridge funding gap of the project cost through DF. The appellant vide its letter dated 09.03.2009 intimated the Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi that levy of DF is in the nature of statutory levy to fund a public purpose and not towards rendition of any service per se. That the DF is not in connection with provision of taxable service, and hence not subject of levy of Service Tax.
7. The adjudicating Authority adjudicated the aforementioned Show Cause Notices vide the common impugned order wherein demand of Rs. 262,06,24,787/- was confirmed under Proviso to Section 73(1) of Finance act, 1994. An amount of Rs. 130,17,48,797/- already deposited by the appellant under protest, was appropriated, interest under Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994 demanded and penalties under Section 78 and 76 of the Act ibid, were imposed. H

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

g)
iii. Commissioner of Central Excise v. Cochin International Airport Ltd-2009 (16) STR 401 (Ker)
10. Learned DR supported the impugned order contending that in the impugned order the appellant as well as the passengers did not entertain the idea that they were collecting or paying a tax when transacting in the development fee and thereby seeking to counter the plea on behalf of the appellant, that this levy should have the status of a tax.
11. We find that identical issue has been dealt with by the co-ordinate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Mumbai International Airport P. Ltd. Vs Commr. Of ST-I, Mumbai-2017 (51) STR 280 (Tri-Mumbai) as under:-
“8. The tax authorized to be collected as per Section 65(105)(zzm) of Finance Act, 1994 after 1st July, 2010 is on service :
“to any person, by airport authority or any other person, in any airport or a civil enclave”
for the period prior to that was :
“to any person, by airports authority or any person authorized by it, in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nger during the period of levy of 'development fee.' These are basic facilities that is inherent in the civil aviation sector in which the appellant, a non-public sector entity, is a recent entrant.
10.Civil aviation sector in India was, for long, under the monopoly of the Government of India with carriage effected by two corporations established by Acts of Parliament and the 'ground facilities' under the control of the Ministry of Civil Aviation. Air carriage was de-nationalised first and, in keeping with the evolving trend of autonomy for infrastructure sector, management of airports were consolidated under a single authority with the enactment of the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994. Later on, airport operators were brought into the legislative framework by incorporation of leasing mechanism. The appellant is one such.
11.Owing to this transition from being a departmental undertaking of the Government to an authority with consequent financial independence but at the same ti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ts of the Authority.
12.Section 22 of the Act enables the airport authority to charge users of its facilities. We have noted supra that this provision was never invoked for passengers and payments were restricted to and only upon exercise of option to procure food and non-food articles from licencees situated in the airport premises. On the other hand, the levy under Section 22A of the Act did not afford the privilege of exercise of an option by the passenger and enforced, without consent of the passenger, through the airlines on the basis of passenger data furnished by them on a fortnightly basis. The amounts so collected were placed in an escrow account owing to the restricted scope of expenditure being specifically enumerated in Section 22A of the Act. There is, therefore, a substantive difference between a charge under Section 22 and levy under Section 22A. It could well be said that charge under Section 22 if visited upon a passenger would be a consideration for a service. Such

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

purpose. We cannot agree with this contention because the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the very same decision has directed that the amount so collected should necessarily be used only for the purpose intended in Section 22A of the Act. In that context, the attempt by Revenue to cite intention of the two parties by reference to Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. supra as germane to delinking it from tax is rendered irrelevant.
15.The decision of the Tribunal in Cochin International Airport Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Kochi-2007 (7) STR 468 (Tri-Bang) affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala- 2009 (16) STR 401 (Ker) and by the Hon'ble Supreme Court-2010 (17) STR J79 (SC) has again clarified that the 'development fee' is not linked to provision of service and hence not liable to service tax. The Hon'ble High Court of Kerala had observed thus :
“… … … Even though Airport is also rendering services to the passengers like restaurants, air-conditioning, facility for fo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of taxable services for charging service tax says that the value of service shall be gross amount charged by the service provider for the service provided to the recipient. Since collection of users fee is not for any specific service rendered by them, but is a flat rate of charge to one category of passengers namely, outgoing international passengers, it cannot be said that the amount so collected is by way of service charge. We, therefore, hold that the Tribunal rightly held that no service tax is payable for the users fee collected by the respondent. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.”
12. We in complete agreement with the conclusion arrived at hold that the ratio of the above said judgment squarely covers the case in hand. We find no reason or occasion to differ with the same. In view of the above and the definition of 'airport services' in Section 65(105) (zzm), we hold that service tax is not chargeable on Development Fee. Accordingly we find that the impugned order is not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Retailer Allegedly Profiteers by Not Passing GST Rate Cuts to Consumers, Violating Section 171 Provisions.

Retailer Allegedly Profiteers by Not Passing GST Rate Cuts to Consumers, Violating Section 171 Provisions.
Case-Laws
GST
Profiteering – benefit of reduction in the GST rate not passed – base price of goods also increased – Respondent has violated the provisions of section 171 in as much as the prices have remained the same inspite of reduction in the tax rate. His plea that the base prices were drastically lowered when GST came in effect cannot absolve him from not passing on the benefi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Group of Ministers (GoM) constituted on issues relating to lottery

Group of Ministers (GoM) constituted on issues relating to lottery
GST
Dated:- 17-1-2019

In pursuance of decision in the 32nd Meeting of GST Council held on 10th January, 2019 at New Delhi, a Group of Ministers (GoM) on issues relating to lottery has been constituted.
The 'GoM for Lottery' shall consist of the following:
Sl. No.
Name
Designation and State
1
Shri Sudhir Mungantiwar
Finance Minister, Government of Maharashtra
Convener
2
Dr. T.M. Thomas Isaac
Finance Minister, Government of Kerala
Member
3
Dr. Amit Mitra
Finance Minister, Government of West Bengal
Member
4
Dr. Himanta Biswa Sarma
Finance Minister, Government of Assam
Member
5
Shri Mauvin Godinho
Minister of Panchayat, Governmen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Valuation – Concept of Pure Agent Defined

Valuation – Concept of Pure Agent Defined
By: – CA Akash Phophalia
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 17-1-2019

Introduction
Revenue laws are often called as incomplete without valuation. Tax is always charged on some basic value and guiding principles to calculate such value is enumerated in the concerned law itself. In fact come times courts had held inapplicability of taxation in case where valuation is failed. In this article the author aims to discuss includibility of expenses incurred during the course of provision of services in the value of services under GST law in the light of a recent AAR ruling held by West Bengal in the case of Premier Vigilance and Security Pvt Ltd 2018 (11) TMI 337 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL
Legal Provisions
The valuation principles are enumerated in Section 15 of the CGST Act 2017. The governing provision of Section 15 is further preceded by the rules stated at Rule 28 to Rule 35 in CGST Rules 2017. According to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ddition to the services he supplies on his own account.
Explanation – For the purposes of this rule, the expression ―pure agent‖ means a person who-
(a) enters into a contractual agreement with the recipient of supply to act as his pure agent to incur expenditure or costs in the course of supply of goods or services or both;
(b) neither intends to hold nor holds any title to the goods or services or both so procured or supplied as pure agent of the recipient of supply;
(c) does not use for his own interest such goods or services so procured; and
(d) receives only the actual amount incurred to procure such goods or services in addition to the amount received for supply he provides on his own account.”
Illustration. Corporate services firm A is engaged to handle the legal work pertaining to the incorporation of Company B. Other than its service fees, A also recovers from B, registration fee and approval fee for the name of the company paid to the Registrar of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

application that it owed the vehicles and the toll is charged for providing the services by way of access to a road or bridge. The company being the owner of the vehicles was the recipient of the services provisioned on payment of toll, which was compulsorily levied on the vehicles. The expenses so incurred were, therefore, cost of the services provided to the banks reimbursement of such cost was no disbursement, but merely the recovery of a portion of the value of supply made to banks.
Conclusion
In view of the legal provisions cited and the facts mentioned above it was held that the company was not acting in the capacity of a 'pure agent 'of the bank while paying toll charges were cost incurred, so that his vehicles can access roads/bridges to provided security services to the recipients.
Toll charges paid are not, therefore to be excluded from the value of supply Rule 33. GST shall, therefore be payable at the applicable rate on the entire value of the supply including toll char

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

MESSRS MONO STEEL (INDIA) LTD. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

MESSRS MONO STEEL (INDIA) LTD. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT
GST
2019 (2) TMI 827 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT – 2019 (22) G. S. T. L. 184 (Guj.)
GUJARAT HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 17-1-2019
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 618 of 2019
GST
MS HARSHA DEVANI AND DR A. P. THAKER, JJ.
For The Petitioner (s) : AMAL PARESH DAVE (8961) AND MR PARESH M DAVE (260)
For The Petitioner (s) : MR PARESH M DAVE(260)-G/425/1986 And ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP(99)
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
1. Mr. Paresh Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that for recovery of a sum of rupees three crore and odd, six bank accounts of the petitioner have been provisionally attached by issuing notices

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Haryana Chambers of Commerce And Industries Versus Union of India And ors.

Haryana Chambers of Commerce And Industries Versus Union of India And ors.
GST
2019 (1) TMI 1215 – PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT – TMI
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 17-1-2019
CWP-31710-2018 (O&M)
GST
MR AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MRS MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, JJ.
For The Petitioner : Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocate
For The Respondents : Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advocate
ORDER
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.
Prayer in the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

EDAYAR METALS Versus UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE), NEW DELHI, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE (GST WING), FINANCE (REV. 1) DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI, GST COUNCIL, NEW DELHI, GOODS AND SERVICES TAX NETWORK, NEW DELHI, THE COMMISSI

EDAYAR METALS Versus UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE), NEW DELHI, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE (GST WING), FINANCE (REV. 1) DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI, GST COUNCIL, NEW DELHI, GOODS AND SERVICES TAX NETWORK, NEW DELHI, THE COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE NODEL OFFICER FOR STATE GST, KERALA, THE NODEL OFFICER, CENTRAL GST, GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., THE STATE TAX OFFICER, PARAVUR AND THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM,
GST
2019 (1) TMI 1080 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 17-1-2019
WP (C). No. 41783 of 2018
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The Petitioner(s) : ADV. SRI

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader, besides perusing the record.
3. There is a circular issued by the Government of India for “setting up an IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism to address the grievances of taxpayers due to technical glitches on GST Portal.” Paragraph 5 of the circular outlines the procedure the Nodal Officers is to follow. It reads:
5. Nodal officers and identification of issues 5.1 GSTN, Central and State government would appoint nodal officers in requisite number to address the problem a taxpayer faces due to glitches, if any, in the Common Portal. This would be publicized adequately.
5.2 Taxpayers shall make an application to the field officers or the nodal officers where there wa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

lutions for resolution of the problem. ”
(italics supplied)
4. Not only the petitioner but also many other people faced this technical glitch and approached this Court. Both the learned counsel submit that this Court on earlier occasions permitted the petitioners to apply to the additional sixth respondent for the issue resolution.
5. So, in this case also, the petitioner may apply to the Nodal Officer. The petitioner applying, the Nodal Officer will look into the issue and facilitate the petitioner's uploading FORM GST TRAN-1, without reference to the time-frame. Ordered so.
6. I may also observe that if the petitioner applies within two weeks after receiving this judgment, the Nodal Officer will consider it and take steps within a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =