Goods and Services Tax

Jagdish Kanani Versus Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Indore
GST
2019 (3) TMI 485 – MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT – 2019 (23) G. S. T. L. 460 (M. P.)
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 26-2-2019
M. Cr. C. No. 3472/2019
GST
Vivek Rusia J.
For the Petitioner : Shri Vivek Dalal, learned counsel
For the Respondent : Shri Prasanna Prasad, learned counsel
ORDER
This is a first application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by petitioner- Jagdish Kanani, who has been arrested by the respondent on 31.5.2018 during investigation in Cr. Case registered as Crime No.43/2018 by Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Indore for the offence punishable under Section 132 (1) (a), (b) and (c) of Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter, for short, “GST Act”).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
3. As per prosecution/respondent story, Commissioner and Additional Commissioner noticed huge tax evasion and fraud in respect of payment of GST in t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ms received fake invoices of Rs. 9,217.14 Lakhs for inward supply and issued fake invoices of Rs. 9,799.09 Lakhs for outward supplies. Accordingly, Jagdish Kanani and his partner defrauded Govt. Exchequer and evaded the GST to the tune of Rs. 3,422.02 Lakhs i.e. @ 18% of total supply Rs. 19,016.23 Lakhs by creating such bogus firms. In the course of investigation, the petitioner Jagdish Kanani appeared at CGST & Central Excise Head Quarter on 4.1.2019 and his statements were recorded u/s. 70 of the GST Act. He was confronted with evidence collected during the course of investigation. In his statement, he has disclosed all the information available with him and also admitted that he did not receive any goods physically nor he sold any goods and he did not submit any GST return. He is in contact with Mehul since 1994.
4. The petitioner was formally arrested on 5.1.2019 and produced before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class on 8.1.2019.
Thereafter, he applied for regular bail u/s. 439

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n bail.
6. On the other hand, Shri Prasanna Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/prosecution, opposes the bail application. He has produced the statement of the petitioner and other witnesses. He submits that the statement recorded by the petitioner is admissible in evidence and which can be used against him in the trial as held by this Court in the case of M/s. R.S. Company V/s. Commissioner of Central Excise (CEA No.24/2012) decided on 8.2.2017. The main accused have not been arrested so far, hence the bail application be rejected.
7. U/s. 69 of the GST Act, the Commissioner is having power to arrest if he has reasons to believe that a person has committed an offence specified in Clause (a) or (b) or (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 132 of the GST Act. Section 132(1) (a), (b) and (c) of GST Act define types of offences and according to which, whoever commits offence of supply of any goods or services without issue of any invoice or issues any invoice or bill withou

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Re: M/s. Piyush Polytex Industries Pvt. Ltd.
GST
2019 (2) TMI 1606 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL – 2019 (22) G. S. T. L. 318 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL – AAR
Dated:- 26-2-2019
Case Number/ARN 43 of 2018 Order No. 41/WBAAR/2018-19
GST
SHRI SYDNEY D'SILVA, AND SHRI PARTHASARATHI DEY, MEMBER
Applicant's representative heard Shri Supriyo Banerjee, Authorized Representative
Preamble
A person within the ambit of Section 100 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 or West Bengal Goods and Services Act, 2017 (hereinafter collectively called 'the GST Act'), if aggrieved by this Ruling, may appeal against it before the West Bengal Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, constituted under Section 99 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Act, 2017, within a period of thirty days from the date of communication of this Ruling, or within such further time as mentioned in the proviso to Section 100 (2) of the GST Act.
E

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

1.4 The officer concerned raises no objection to the admission of the Application.
1.5 The Application is, therefore, admitted.
2. Submissions of the Applicant
2.1 The Applicant in Annexure-I of the Application discusses probable classification of different types of fabrics manufactured by them, but remains silent on the description & HSN of Bags/Sacks, on which the Ruling is sought. The Applicant only states that non-woven bags/sacks are made of P.P. Non-woven Fabric and it falls under Chapter Heading 63 of the GST Tariff. In this regard the Applicant relies upon AAR Order No. CT/5492/18-C3 dated 29/05/2018 = 2018 (6) TMI 560 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, KERALA passed by the Authority for Advance Ruling, Kerala.
3. Submissions of the Revenue
3.1 With reference to Question no. (i) & (ii), on which Advance Ruling is sought, Revenue mentions that Circular No. 80/54/2018-TRU dated 31/12/2018 clarifies the matter in Para-7 and states in Para-7.4 that “thus it is clarified that P

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

f the Notification No. 01/2017- CT (Rate) dated 28/06/2017. Here, the relevant portion of Tariff item 6305 33 00 under the GST Tariff is also mentioned, which covers sacks and bags, of a kind used for packing of goods, made of man-made textile materials which are not flexible intermediate bulk containers but are of polyethylene or polypropylene strip or the like.
4.3. However, TRU clarification under Circular No. 80/54/2018-GST issued under F. No. 354/432/2018-TRU dated 31/12/2018 in Para 7, sub-Para 7.4 clarifies that Polypropylene woven and non-woven  bags and PP woven and non-woven bags laminated with BOPP would be classified as plastic bags under HS Code 3923 and would attract 18% GST; and in Para 7, sub-Para 7.5 clarifies that non-laminated woven bags would be classified as per their constituting materials. Whether the bag/sack has handle or not, is of no consequence here.
4.4. HS Code 3923 covers articles of the conveyance or packing of goods, of plastics; etc. Sub-Heading

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Re: M/s. Sarj Educational Centre
GST
2019 (2) TMI 1605 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL – 2019 (22) G. S. T. L. 315 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL – AAR
Dated:- 26-2-2019
Case Number 42 of 2018 Order No. 42/WBAAR/2018-19
GST
SHRI SYDNEY D'SILVA, SHRI PARTHASARATHI DEY, MEMBER
Applicant's representative heard Sumit Nandy, ACA Aloke Kumar Ghosh, Advocate
Preamble
A person within the ambit of Section 100 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 or West Bengal Goods and Services Act, 2017 (hereinafter collectively called 'the GST Act'), if aggrieved by this Ruling, may appeal against it before the West Bengal Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, constituted under Section 99 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Act, 2017, within a period of thirty days from the date of communication of this Ruling, or within such further time as mentioned in the proviso to Section 100 (2) of the GST Act.
Every such Appeal shall b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n 97(2)(a) & (b) of the GST Act.
1.3 The Applicant states that the question raised in the Application has neither been decided by nor is pending before any authority under any provision of the GST Act.
1.4 The officer concerned from the Revenue has raised no objection to the admission of the Application.
1.5 The Application is, therefore, admitted.
2. Submissions of the Applicant
2.1. The Applicant, according to the Written Submission made at the time of Hearing, has entered into an MOU with St. Michael's School under the management of Sunshine Educational Society, for providing boarding facility exclusively to the students of the said school. The boarding facility shall include lodging, housekeeping, laundry, medical assistance and food. The consideration is a consolidated charge on the individual boarder for the combination of the services.
2.2. The Applicant refers to Circular No. 32/06/2018 dated 12/02/2018 of CBIC. It has clarified that accommodation service to students in a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

notification. The Applicant is not an educational institution within the meaning of the above clause. Although the services are provided in terms of an MOU with St Michael's School, the Applicant charges the consideration on the individual students. Being liable to pay the consideration, such students are, therefore recipients of the Applicant's services and not the educational institution. Sl. No. 66 of the Exemption Notification is, therefore, not applicable.
4.2. The Applicant provides services to both day boarders and boarders requiring lodging facilities. In FY 2018-19, the annual consideration for the services without lodging facilities are segregated and charged on the day boarders at Rs. 71,800/- per head, of which Rs. 66,000/- is boarding fees. The boarding fees for those who enjoy lodging facilities is Rs. 1,56,000/- per head. These lodgers have to pay an additional amount of Rs. 13,600/- per head for housekeeping and laundry services, whereas the day boarders pay only Rs.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CT (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 (hereinafter the Rate Notification), as amended from time to time. Housekeeping, including maintenance, is classifiable under SAC 9987 and taxable at 18% rate under Sl No. 25(ii) of the Rate Notification. Laundry service is classifiable under SAC 9997 and taxable at 18% rate under Sl. No. 35 of the Rate Notification.
4.5. The bundle of services offered to the recipients, therefore, consists of both taxable and nontaxable supplies. It is also evident that although the services are offered in a bundle, they are not indivisible, and different considerations are paid for different packages of such services offered to the recipients, depending upon their requirement for lodging facility. For example, laundry service is not offered to the day boarders. These are not, therefore, bundles of taxable supplies that are inseparable and supplied only in conjunction with one another in ordinary course of business. The services the Applicant supplies are not, therefore, co

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

In Re: Nipha Exports Pvt. Ltd.
GST
2019 (2) TMI 1604 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL – 2019 (23) G. S. T. L. 314 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, WEST BENGAL – AAR
Dated:- 26-2-2019
Case No. 02 of 2019 Order No. 43/WBAAR/2018-19
GST
SHRI SYDNEY D'SILVA, AND SHRI PARTHASARATHI DEY, MEMBER
Applicant's representative heard: Shri Nikhil Jha, FCA
Preamble
A person within the ambit of Section 100 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 or West Bengal Goods and Services Act, 2017 (hereinafter collectively called 'the GST Act'), if aggrieved by this Ruling, may appeal against it before the West Bengal Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, constituted under Section 99 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Act, 2017, within a period of thirty days from the date of communication of this Ruling, or within such further time as mentioned in the proviso to Section 100 (2) of the GST Act.
Every such Appeal shall be filed in accordance with

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

has purchased an ambulance for the benefit of the employees, as required under Section 45(4) of the Factories Act, 1948. The Applicant argues that the input tax paid on inward supply of the ambulance is eligible for credit under the Second Proviso to Section 17(5)(b) of the GST Act, as amended w.e.f. 01/02/2019.
3. Observation & Findings of the Authority
3.1. The Applicant purchased the ambulance on 22/11/2018, as evident from the submitted Invoice No. INV19A001475 dated 22/11/2018 of M/s Supreme & Co Pvt Ltd (GSTIN: 19AACCA7232K1ZK). The amended provisions of the GST Act that the Applicant refers to have come into effect from 01/02/2019 vide Notification No. 2/2019-CT dated 29/01/2019. Section 17(5) of the GST Act, as it stood prior to the amendment, is, therefore, relevant. Eligibility for claiming input tax credit under section 16(1) is subject to the provisions of law at the time of occurrence of the taxable event, irrespective of when the claim is made. Second proviso to sectio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

sed by a registered person for making an outward taxable supply of the same category of goods or services or both or as an element of a taxable composite or mixed supply;
(ii) membership of a club, health and fitness centre;
(iii) rent-a-cab, life insurance and health insurance except where-
(A) the Government notifies the services which are obligatory for an employer to provide to its employees under any law for the time being in force; or
(B) such inward supply of goods or services or both of a particular category is used by a registered person for making an outward taxable supply of the same category of goods or services or both or as an element of a taxable composite or mixed supply; and
(iv) travel benefits extended to employees on vacation such as leave or home travel concession;
(c) works contract services when supplied for construction of an immovable property (other than plant and machinery) except where it is an input service for further supply of works contract s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rayudu Vision Media Ltd Versus CCT, Secunderabad – GST
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1568 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – 2019 (25) G. S. T. L. 234 (Tri. – Hyd.)
CESTAT HYDERABAD – AT
Dated:- 26-2-2019
Appeal No.ST/1934/2010 – A/30266/2019
Service Tax
Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. P. Venkata Subba Rao, Member (Technical)
Ms Swetha, Advocate for the Appellant.
Shri V.R. Pavan Kumar, Superintendent/AR for the Respondent.
ORDER
Per: P.V. Subba Rao.
1. This appeal is filed against Order-in-Original No. 34/2010-ST dated 07.05.2010.
2. The appellant is engaged in imparting training in various courses in the field of animation like 2D Animation, Extreme 3D, Extreme Compositing (SHAKE), Advance Training (FCP) etc. On gathering intelligence about the activities carried out by the appellant they were asked by the department to register themselves with the service tax department in 2006. The appellant contested this direction stating that they are exempted from the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

'commercial training and coaching service' and an amount of Rs. 2,36,484/- under 'video tape production agency service' were issued. After following due process the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, vide impugned order, confirmed the demands with interest under Sec.75 of the Finance Act, 1994. He also imposed penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Sec.77 and penalty equal to the duty demanded under Sec.78 of the Finance Act. Aggrieved by this order, the present appeal has been filed on the following grounds:
a. They are providing vocational training or coaching and hence are entitled to the benefit of exemption notification 24/2004-ST. It is evident from the brochures and prospectus the trainees join the institute to get trained for employment oriented course. Accordingly, the benefit of notification 24/2004-ST dated 10.9.2004 is available to them. They relied on the following case laws:
i. Sunwin Technosolutions Pvt Ltd [2007 (7) STR 700]
ii. Doon Institute of Information Techno

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

sideration in terms of agreement dated 1-7-2006 to a company in New Zealand and received consideration in foreign exchange. Therefore, the same should be treated as an export of service. Further, the consideration would be covered by exemption notification which applies to small scale service providers because the rest of their services were not chargeable to service tax. If the small scale exemption is considered only an amount of Rs. 7,385/- is liable to be paid which has also been discharged with interest. In view of the above, they submitted that the production of animation movie undertaken by them is also not liable to service tax as it is an export of service.
3. On limitation, the appellant argued that they had not paid service tax because they were and are still of the view that they are not liable to pay the same. They have not suppressed or wilfully misstated or colluded or committed any fraud or contravened any provisions of the act or rules with an intention to evade payme

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ould be treated as cum-tax values and service tax should be calculated accordingly.
5. Learned departmental representative reiterates the findings of the lower authority.
6. We have considered the arguments on both sides and perused the records. There is no dispute on the facts of the case that appellant is providing training and coaching in computer animation services which according to the appellant is exempted as per notification 24/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004 as amended from time to time. According to the revenue their coaching is provided in computer hardware and software and therefore, they are excluded from the benefit of this exemption notification. A related issue is the taxability of the video film which they produced and sold to a buyer in New Zealand. The appellant contends that this should be treated as export of service and hence no service tax can be levied on the same. However, they paid service tax on this service after availing the benefit of small scale service provid

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rovided in relation to commercial training or coaching by a computer training institute.”
In explanation to the notification clause (3) has been added as follows:
“III) Computer training institute means computer training or coaching centre which provides coaching or training relating to computer software or hardware.”
8. The point of dispute is whether the animation coaching provided by the appellant should be treated as computer training in terms of the aforesaid notification or otherwise. We find in the particular facts and circumstances of the case that the appellant's coaching is not computer animation and not any computer software or hardware. When a student passes out the course he will not become either a computer hardware or a software professional but he becomes professional in using the computer software to produce animation and animation films. This is similar to CAD software or TALLY software used by professionals in their work. In our view, the test to decide whether or

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Versus M/s. SSI Media India Pvt. Ltd.
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1566 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 26-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/410/2012 – Final Order No. 40378/2019
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Appellant
None for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
Brief facts are that the respondents are engaged in providing advertising services by displaying the advertisement of their clients on bus back panels, bus shelters etc., after obtaining permission from MTC, TNSTC and Southern Railway. They obtained service tax registration under the category of Advertising Agency Service. During the course of audit of the accounts of the respondents, for the period from October and November 2009, it was noticed that the respondents had short-paid service tax during the period from October 2008 to February 2009 an

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he half-year ending 31.3.2009 declared the taxable value lesser than that was actually received by them. It was further noticed that they had not discharged service tax liability for the period July 2009 to October 2009. They had not paid the service tax within the prescribed dates for the period from September 2008 to October 2009 and had not paid appropriate interest for such belated payment. This would show that the respondent is guilty of suppression of facts with intention to evade payment of duty. The adjudicating authority has failed to take note of these facts of suppression and imposed penalty only under section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. He prayed that the impugned order may be interfered with by imposing penalty under section 78 of the Act ibid.
3. None appeared for the respondent though notices were issued for hearing.
4. The matter is taken up for disposal after hearing the ld. AR and on perusal of records.
5. The grievance of the department is that the adjudicating a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

We have given our anxious consideration to the argument put forward by the ld. AR. After the amendment with effect from 10.5.2008, last proviso to section 78 states that if penalty is payable under such section, the provisions of section 76 shall not apply. Therefore, the penalties under sections 76 and 78 are mutually exclusive. When the adjudicating authority has considered and imposed penalty under section 76, the same cannot be set aside by the Tribunal in an appeal filed by department requesting to impose penalty under Secction78. There is no ground stated in this appeal contending that penalty imposed under Section 76 is erroneous. The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Vs. Sai Consulting Engineering Ltd. – 2018 (15) GSTL 708 (Guj.) has held that simultaneous penalties under Section 76 as well as 78 of the Finance Act cannot be imposed. Similar view is taken in Care and Cure (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh – 2015 (38) S

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Liability on collecting blood samples for cancer testing outside india
Query (Issue) Started By: – AKReddy andCO Dated:- 25-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 27-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Dear Sir,
Can anyone help me in deciding whether we have to pay GST on collecting blood samples from patients in India and providing the same to a lab in USA. The USA lab will bill me and i will pay to him, am I need to pay GST under RCM in this transaction. Am I need to char

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST ON TOUR PACKAGE
Query (Issue) Started By: – CABIJENDERKUMAR BANSAL Dated:- 25-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 26-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
Query : Tour Operator, XYZ has provided tour package for 6 days to Mr. A, a resident of the USA at US $. 50,000. The itinerary of the package is a follows:-
Day 1: Flight from Delhi to Jaipur
Day 2 & 3: Sightseeing in Jaipur
Day 4: Flight from Jaipur to Kathmandu Nepal
Day 5 & 6 : Sightseeing in Kathmandu
Combined tour p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund of accumulated -ITC of Compensation Cess
Query (Issue) Started By: – Prem Choudhary Dated:- 25-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 27-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
Dear Expert
Please advice for refund provision if any for following Case:-
The manufacturer are producing Cement and Clinker under HSN-2526 and Sales within in India. Cement is taxable @28% ( SGST-14% & CGST-14%) and no any GST Compensation Cess is leviable. However in production of Cement, Coal is require to running the Kilan(generating the heat) and on procurement of Coal Cess is leviable @ ₹ 400/- per tone.
As per provision of Act, Compensation Cess can be utiliase for payment of out put Cess only. Hence Compensation Cess is going to a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Refund of compensation cess paid on goods exported is admissible. Read Section 16(3)(b) of IGST Act, 2017.
This issue has been clarified vide C.B.I. & C. Circular No. 79/53/2018-GST, dated 31-12-2018. (Point No.9 is relevant).
Reply By Prem Choudhary:
The Reply:
Thank you Sethi ji for providing reference of provision and clarity,
We have gone through the Circular No.-45/19/2018-GST Point no-05 and your reply pint no-(i),
Kindly more clarify is require, In our Case Cement sale is within India and having accumulated Compensation Cess ITC. Whether we are eligible to claim refund of accumulated compensation Cess ITC ?
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
In view of Board's clarification, you are eligible for refund claim of Compensat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Issue related with IGCR for job work vendor
Query (Issue) Started By: – Kyle Zhu Dated:- 25-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 26-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
Dear Exports,
I wanna discuss a case as bellow :
Raw Material imported by a foreign company A under IGCR Benefit than send to Vendor factory for further manufacturing and return back i.e. JOB WORK.
If the company A colud process this case Under IGCR ?
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Dear Querist,
In my

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Related Party Trnasactions
Query (Issue) Started By: – Kaustubh Karandikar Dated:- 25-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 27-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 1 Reply
GST
XYZ(Proprietor) received Interest free loan from PQR (HUF). Both XYZ and PQR are related. Will it have any GST implications? Loan being given without charging any interest and XYZ and PQR being related, will it not amount to service provided by PQR to XYZ and for related person even without consideration, GST is require

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

What will be GST rates on pending payments for house purchase
Query (Issue) Started By: – Amit Agarwal Dated:- 25-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 25-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 1 Reply
GST
I booked a house in June 2016, for amount say ₹ 50L,and paid ₹ 10% of the total value that is 5L to book house. I paid 12% GST charges on booking amount that is 5 Lakhs.
Now as building is completed, builder asked me to pay rest 45 Lakh plus GST and final demand note for ₹

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

PROOF OF EXPORT OF SOFTWARE and SERVICES
Query (Issue) Started By: – Durga KARUMURU Dated:- 25-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 25-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 1 Reply
GST
What is the proof of Software or Services exported, required under GST.
A Software company providing services to an overseas company does it need GST Registration?
Do professional Accountants providing consultancy services to overseas clients need to provide any proof under GST?
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
(1) SOFTEX (software export details) Form/Return is the proof of export. Monitored by Department of Electronics, DGFT and Customs. More details are as under:-
FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT (EXPORT OF GOODS AND SERVICES) REGULATIONS, 2015
[RBI

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

about LUT on basis of ARN received from GST
Query (Issue) Started By: – kamal soni Dated:- 25-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 25-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
I have ARN no from GST registration yet not completed.application accepted and forwarded to state.
I want LUT to export my consignment.can I have on basis of ARN received from GST dept.
Reply By SHARAD ANADA:
The Reply:
GST Regn is must for application of LUT
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Yes. Withou

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. SAT Vision Network Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore
Service Tax
2019 (3) TMI 46 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 25-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/660/2012 – Final Order No. 40373/2019
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri R. Balagopal, Consultant for the Appellant
Ms. T. Usha Devi, DC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The appellant was engaged in cable operator service. On investigation, it was found that when compared to the amount paid by cable operators to the MSO, the service tax paid by cable operators was far below the actual tax payable. It was found that the appellant had not discharged the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

gnals, link to the appellant herein. It is therefore pleaded by him that the matter may be remanded to the original authority to give the appellant an opportunity to furnish evidence with respect to the eligibility of CENVAT credit on the input service. The consultant also pleaded to set aside the penalties. He submitted that out of the demand of Rs. 3,04,484/-, they had already paid an amount of Rs. 1,48,461/-.
3. The ld. AR Ms. Usha Devi supported the findings in the impugned order. She submitted that the appellant had not furnished any evidence to show the amount collected by them as well as payment of service tax. The quantification of demand and the penalties imposed are legal and proper.
4. Heard both sides.
5. The appellant has su

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

that there was rivalry between different cable operators and most of the customers did not pay up the amount for which reason they could not discharge the service tax. Further, if they are eligible for CENVAT credit and the same would be eligible for adjustment towards the demand. The appellant has paid up substantial amounts. For these reasons, we hold that the penalties imposed are unwarranted and requires to be set aside which we hereby.
7. From the above discussions, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for the limited purpose of granting the benefit of CENVAT credit on the basis of the documents furnished by the appellant. The penalties are set aside in toto. The appeal is partly allowed, in above terms, with consequen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Coimbatore Lorry Urimaiyalargal Pothunala Trust Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Coimbatore
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1564 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 25-2-2019
Appeal No. ST/661/2012 – Final Order No. 40372/2019
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Ms. D. Naveena, Advocate for the Appellant
Ms. T. Usha Devi, DC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The appellant was issued a show cause notice dated 9.12.2005 demanding service tax under Business Auxiliary Service for the period from 1.8.2003 to 31.3.2005. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand along with interest and imposed

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

to furnish evidence with regard to the reimbursable expenses. The second argument was with regard to the penalties imposed. She submitted that the adjudicating authority has imposed higher amount of penalty than that of the service tax demand confirmed. She submitted that the appellant was under bonafide belief that the activity does not fall under BAS. Therefore, the appellant did not discharge the service tax during the relevant period and was contesting the same before various forums. Therefore, she pleaded that the penalties may be set aside.
3. The ld. AR Ms. Usha Devi supported the findings in the impugned order. She submitted that the appellant has not taken the plea of reimbursable expenses before the lower authorities. It is also

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

to be remanded to the adjudicating authority who shall consider whether any reimbursable expenses are to be excluded from the taxable value that has been arrived by the adjudicating authority.
6. With regard to the penalties, ld. counsel submitted that the appellants were under bonafide belief that the said activity did not fall under BAS. From the litigations taken up by the appellant, we find that the said contention requires to be considered. For this reason, we find that the penalties imposed are unwarranted and requires to be set aside, which we hereby do.
7. From the foregoing discussions, we hold that the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for the limited purpose of looking into whether the reimbursable expenses are t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Continental Milkose India Limited Versus Union Of India And 4 Others
GST
2019 (2) TMI 1456 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 25-2-2019
Writ Tax No. – 227 of 2019
GST
Bharati Sapru And Piyush Agrawal JJ.
For the Petitioner : Rishi Raj Kapoor
For the Respondent : A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Ramesh Chandra Shukla
ORDER
Heard Sri Rishi Raj Kapoor, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rajesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents no.1 to 3.
The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the GST council respondent no.2 to make recommendations to the State Government to extend the time period for filing of GST Tran-1 in the case of the petitioner because his application was not enter

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Council Sets 1% Rate for Affordable Housing, 5% for Other Residential Properties Without ITC Benefit.
News
GST
Recommendations of the 33rd GST Council meeting – Real estate sector – GST f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Recommendations of the 33rd GST Council meeting
GST
Dated:- 24-2-2019

Real estate sector is one of the largest contributors to the national GDP and provides employment opportunity to large numbers of people. “Housing for All by 2022” envisions that every citizen would have a house and the urban areas would be free of slums. There are reports of slowdown in the sector and low off-take of under-construction houses which needs to be addressed. To boost the residential segment of the real estate sector, following recommendations were made by the GST Council in its 33rd meeting held today:
2. GST rate:
i. GST shall be levied at effective GST rate of 5% without ITC on residential properties outside affordable segment;
ii. GST

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

exempted only for such residential property on which GST is payable.
6. Details of the scheme shall be worked out by an officers committee and shall be approved by the GST Council in a meeting to be called specifically for this purpose.
7. Advantages of the recommendations made:
The new tax rate in principle was approved by the Council taking into consideration the following advantages:-
i. The buyer of house gets a fair price and affordable housing gets very attractive with GST @ 1%.
ii. Interest of the buyer/consumer gets protected; ITC benefits not being passed to them shall become a non-issue.
iii. Cash flow problem for the sector is addressed by exemption of GST on development rights, long term lease (premium), FSI etc.
iv.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

supply without consideration
Query (Issue) Started By: – Madhavan iyengar Dated:- 24-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 24-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 1 Reply
GST
After cgst amendment act 2018 wherein sec 7 clause (d) is deleted effective from 01/07/2017
query now any supply made with out consideration will it be liable to gst ( other than exceptions like import of services and transactions between related parties and items specified in schedule I without consideration)
Reply By

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ITC on Electric installation
Query (Issue) Started By: – Hiren Pathak Dated:- 23-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 2-3-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 11 Replies
GST
Dear All,
A company is setting up its manufacturing plant where in power supply by way of supplying and installation of various electric cable connection from main station outside factory premises to company sub station is required from state government. State government instructed company that company can itself set up this electric installation from thier nominated vendor but ultimate ownership of such electric installation (Assets) will remain with state government.
Now question is whether company can claim ITC of such electric installation which mainly constist of supplying and installing various electric cables?
Whether ownership of such electric installation will remain with state govenment and not with compnay, will it have any impact on ITC eligibility?
Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan:
The Reply:
S

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hough the Company may get it done through some other person I.e. sub contractor. Also see .Explanation- (ii) to Section 16(2)(b) inserted vide CGST (Amendment) Act, 2018 effective from 1.2.19
Reply By Alkesh Jani:
The Reply:
Dear Experts,
Can we apply Sl.No.25 of Notification No.12/2017 dated 28.06.2017 (as amended time to time) instant case and can we apply the ratio of decision given by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in case of M/s. Torrent Power Ltd Vs. Union of India SCA No. 5343 of 2018. = 2019 (1) TMI 1092 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Can we consider as, the installation is undertaken as per the direction of the state government and title is not transferred by way of Invoice or anyother documents.
This is to enrich my knowledge through your guidence and views.
Thanks,
With Regards,
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Sh.Alkesh Jani Ji,
Neither Notification nor ratio of High Court judgement is applicable to this situation inasmuch as erection and installation activities ar

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

related services be used for any purpose other than for transmission and distribution of electricity. The principal supply and the related/ancillary services go hand in hand and one cannot be provided independent of the other. The upshot of this discussion is that the services provided by the petitioner are in the nature of composite supply and therefore, in view of the provisions of clause (a) of section 8 of the CGST Act, the tax liability thereof has to be determined by treating such composite same as a supply of the principal supply of transmission and distribution of electricity. Consequently, if the principal supply of transmission and distribution of electricity is exempt from levy of service tax, the tax liability of the related services shall be determined accordingly."
In view of above, can we say that such installation is ancillary service provided?
Thanks,
With due regards
Reply By Hiren Pathak:
The Reply:
Kasturi sir,
Little clarification in facts, My question

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

thereof, which are naturally bundled and supplied in conjunction with each other in the ordinary course of business, one of which is a principal supply;
Illustration. – Where goods are packed and transported with insurance, the supply of goods, packing materials, transport and insurance is a composite supply and supply of goods is a principal supply;
(47) ”exempt supply” means supply of any goods or services or both which attracts nil rate of tax or which may be wholly exempt from tax under section 11, or under section 6 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, and includes non-taxable supply.
108) ”taxable supply” means a supply of goods or services or both which is leviable to tax under this Act;
In view of the above, it can be easily arrived at the conclusion that composite supply consists of two or more taxable supplies and not one taxable and one exempt. Thus exempt supply is excluded from the scope of composite supply. So erection and installation is not ancil

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

and second whether electric installation (Lying of electric cable etc from main power supply station situated outside company premises to company manufacturing plant) can be termed as immovable or movable?
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Sh.Hiren Pathak Ji,
No doubt yours is a manufacturing company but here is a question of what nature of service you are supplying/providing. In my view (based on various case laws), it is a works contract service which you are providing to State Govt. and no exemption is available to you. Now is the question of vendor's service. The vendor is working for you. In other words, we can say that that person is your job worker. So the vendor's service is also of the nature of service being provided by you. His service an integral part of the works contract service being provided. In Works Contract Service, ITC is available if utilised in providing the same output taxable service.So you can avail ITC on the strength of invoice to be issued by y

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s an immovable property. (Power station is an immovable property for which you will work.)There is a Board's circular to this effect and case laws.
You can easily trace out case laws in your support.
Reply By CASusheel Gupta:
The Reply:
The primary responsibility of laying of cable was of state government. SG authorised the company to purchase cable and install it on behalf of SG. The ownership shall rest with the SG.
The SG shall be required to bill the company including the cost of cabling (covered by section 15(2)(b)). Cost of cable though incurred by company shall be included in the value of supply of SG.
Applying the ratio of Torrent Power, the supply from SG to company shall be exempt supply. Being exempt, ITC should not be availed by company, though the bill in the name of company entitles it to avail ITC.
IMO in case the ownership does not rest with SG, section 15(2)(b) shall not be applicable since it can be presumed that SG has only installed the meter and cable was

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Free of Cost Supply – Valuation Implications
By: – CA Akash Phophalia
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 23-2-2019

In this article the author aims to enlighten its readers about the inclusion or non-inclusion of value of FOC material provided by the buyer/service receiver to the seller/service provider.2017
Statutory provisions related to valuation are principally carved out in the Section 15 of the CGST Act 2017. The relevant portion of the said provisions related to the concept clarified hereunder is mentioned as under:-
“Section 15 Value of taxable supply
(1)
(2) The value of supply shall include –
(a) ………………..
(b) any amount that the supplier is liable to pay in relation to such supply but which has been incurred by the recipient of the supply and not included in the price actually paid or payable for the goods or services or both;
(c) ……
(d) ……
(e) ………&helli

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

omponent manufacturer (the two being not related persons or distinct persons) on FOC basis dose not constitute a supply as there is no consideration involved. Further, since the moulds and dies are provided on FOC basis by the OEM to the component manufacturer in the course or furtherance of his business, there is no requirement of reversal of input tax credit availed on such moulds and dies by the OEM.
1.2 It is further clarified that while calculating the value of the supply made by the component manufacturer, the value of moulds and dies provided by the OEM to the component manufacturer of FOC basis shall not be added to the value of such supply because cost of moulds/dies was not to be incurred by the component manufacturer and thus, does not merit inclusion in the value of supply in terms of section 15(2)(b) of the CGST Act 2017.
1.3 However, if the contract between OEM and component manufacturer was for supply of components made by using the moulds/dies belonging to the compone

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

er form the third party are ultimately supplied to the receiver for which tax invoice was raised and GST had been charged. Thus the absolute ownership of the tools gets transferred to the OEM. However, the physical possession of the tool remains with the applicant during manufacturing process or till the time they are removed by the receiver form the premised of the supplier.
Having regard to the clarification issued by the department as mentioned above and in the facts we need to ascertain the contractual obligation to provide tools in terms of the contract executed between the supplier and the receiver. Once it is established that the obligation to provide tools on FOC basis is on the receiver then the question of adding the amortized value for tools supplied by the receiver does not arise. Conclusively, in the given facts of the case the supplier is not required to add value of tools while calculating value of its principle supply of manufacturing of the product under Section 15(2)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Composition Scheme after Amendment(Supplying Goods as well as Service
Query (Issue) Started By: – Prem Choudhary Dated:- 22-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 25-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 12 Replies
GST
Dear Exper
We have heard that amended in Composition scheme for availing scheme for both supplier -goods or Services or both supplier.
However we have not find condition for availing scheme if supplier has supplier both goods and services.
please advice..
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Notification No. 02/2019-Central Tax New Delhi, the 29th January, 2019. Also see Section 5 of the CGST (Amendment )Act, 2018 (31 of 2018 effective from 1.2.2019
Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan:
The Reply:
Sir,
According to Section 10 (1) of CGST Act, 2017 "notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act but subject to the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 9, a registered person, whose aggregate turnover in the preceding financial year did

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

than those referred to in clause (b) of paragraph 6 of Schedule II), of value not exceeding ten per cent. of turnover in a State or Union territory in the preceding financial year or five lakh rupees, whichever is higher.]"
In view of this provision if a supplier makes supply of both goods and services under composition scheme, he can make supply of service upto 10% of the turnover (of what turnover of goods or turnover of both goods and services-not clear from the wordings employed by the legislature) during previous financial year. As the things stand as of noe the turnover is of both goods and services.
Reply By Prem Choudhary:
The Reply:
Sir
In our case , previous year total turnover is less then 1.5 crores and includes ₹ 10 lacs supply of services.
Pls advice we can opt composition scheme w.e.f 01.04.2019
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
In my view, 10% is of turnover of goods. You can opt for Composition Scheme but practically there is a huge loss to the asse

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

preserved properly. The composition scheme eliminates all the requirement. It reduces the cost of compliance. Further, GSTR-2A reconciliation is also not required to these person. Lot of headache is gone in matching the purchase shown in books vs sales uploaded by the vendor. Going ahead the buyer has to call the vendor and ask him to show the sales in GSTR-1 in B2B with proper GSTIN. The call centre type of work will increase in the business. Also, to claim credit the vendors needs to be withing 180 days. The payment tracking is also important to justify claims. Hence, the composition scheme is lucrative. Otherwise as said by collegue expert composition scheme is not beneficial.
Reply By Prem Choudhary:
The Reply:
Sir
Dealer is going to discontinue supply of Services and only supply of goods in future. We have confusion in condition related to to amendment that the "value not exceeding ten per cent. of turnover in a State or Union territory in the preceding financial year or

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

unting to ₹ 5 Lacs in condition is maximum limit of Service value in previous year for opting Composition Scheme.
Reply By Prem Choudhary:
The Reply:
Thank you so much for clarifying amendment of Composition Scheme.
One more Clarity is require for followings:-
Case- if dealers are supplying of goods, running canteen and providing service of courier in previous year.
Query:-
1. What are the rate applicable in case dealer want to opt Composition from 1.4.2019 ? whether Separate rate is applicable for canteen (5%) ? or single rate of entire turnover (1% ).
2 Sec-10(1)''For complying of Condition of up to 10% of total turnover or 5 Lacs'', Canteen supply is also consider as Service or excluding Canteen ?
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
For mixed supplies under composition it is 6 % (CGST 3%+SGST 3%)
Reply By SHARAD ANADA:
The Reply:
Logic behind ₹ 5 Lakh is, suppose you have started business in the year 18-19 and do not have any turnover in previo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Input Credit
Query (Issue) Started By: – Ethirajan Parthasarathy Dated:- 22-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 23-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
A Business entity spends on interior including false ceiling and the service provider charges GST on works contract. The building is owned by the business entity. Is it eligible to take input credit of GST paid or interior including false ceiling.
Will situation be different if the building is rented premises.
Reply By KA

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Availement of Input Tax Credit on Motor vehicles
Query (Issue) Started By: Dated:- 22-2-2019 Last Reply Date:- 23-2-2019 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
Can some one help me on below query ?
Recently through an amendment, Input Tax Credit is allowed on Motor Vehicles if the approved seating capacity is more than 13 persons ( Including Drivers ) , Input Tax Credit is admissible with out any restriction. The same is effective from 01-02-2019.
In the case of following situations ,
If the Date of Rendering of Services falls before 01-02-2019 [ Effective Date of Amendment ], But the Invoices for the same has been received after 01-02-2019 [ Effective Date of Amendment ] –
Can the recepient of the service claim th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

5) above (a) are same even after amendment w.e.f. 1.2.19.
Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan:
The Reply:
Sir,
Section 17 (5) prescribes that "notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 16 and sub-section (1) of section 18, input tax credit shall not be available in respect of the following, namely :-
[(a) motor vehicles for transportation of persons having approved seating capacity of not more than thirteen persons (including the driver), except when they are used for making the following taxable supplies, namely:-
(A) further supply of such motor vehicles; or
(B) transportation of passengers; or
(C) imparting training on driving such motor vehicles
Therefore motor vehicles for transportation of persons havi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ry and not others.
According to Section 13 (2) CGST Act, 2017 "the time of supply of services shall be the earliest of the following dates, namely :-
(a) the date of issue of invoice by the supplier, if the invoice is issued within the period prescribed under [* * *] section 31 or the date of receipt of payment, whichever is earlier; or
(b) the date of provision of service, if the invoice is not issued within the period prescribed under [* * *] section 31 or the date of receipt of payment, whichever is earlier; or
(c) the date on which the recipient shows the receipt of services in his books of account, in a case where the provisions of clause (a) or clause (b) do not apply :
Therefore if the invoice is issued

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =