Goods and Services Tax

Corrigendum to Circular No. 57/31/2018-GST dated 4th September, 2018 issued vide F. No. CBEC/20/16/4/2018-GST corresponding to Circular No. 18/2018-GST (State)
F.1-11(8)-TAX/GST/2018/10393-99 Dated:- 12-11-2018 Tripura SGST
GST – States
NO.F.1-11(8)-TAX/GST/2018/10393-99
GOVERNMENT OF TRIPURA
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
PANDIT NEHRU COMPLEX, GURKHABASTI
AGARTALA, TRIPURA WEST, PIN-799006.
Dated, Agartala, the 12th November, 2018.
Corrigendum to Circular No. 18/2018 – GST (State)
To
The Additional Commissioner of State Tax /
Superintendent of State Tax (All) /
Inspector of State Tax (All)
Subject: Reg.
The Department of Revenue, GST Policy Wing vide Corrigendum to Circular No. 57/31/2018-GST dated 4th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

gesh Kumar B, IAS)
Chief Commissioner of State Tax
Government of Tripura
Corrigendum to Circular No. 57/31/2018-GST
CBEC/20/16/04/2018-GST
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs
GST Policy Wing
New Delhi, Dated the 5th November, 2018
To,
The Principal Chief Commissioners/ Chief Commissioners/ Principal Commissioners/
Commissioners of Central Tax (All)
The Principal Directors General/ Directors General (All)
Madam/Sir,
Subject: Corrigendum to Circular No. 57/31/2018-GST dated 4th September, 2018 issued vide F. No. CBEC/20/16/4/2018-GST – Reg.
In para 9 of the Circular No. 57/31/2018-GST dated 4th September, 2018,
for
“However, in cases where the supply of a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of an agriculturist. Further, as per provisions of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 23 of the CGST Act an agriculturist who supplies produce out of cultivation of land is not liable for registration and therefore does not fall within the ambit of the term “taxable person”. Thus a commission agent who is making supplies on behalf of such an agriculturist, who is not a taxable person, is not liable for compulsory registration under clause (vii) of section 24 of the CGST Act. However, where a commission agent is liable to pay tax under reverse charge, such an agent will be required to get registered compulsorily under section 24 (iii) of the CGST Act.”
2. It is requested that suitable trade notices may be issued to publicize the conte

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Saji S., Proprietor, Adithya and Ambadi Traders, Ranjith R., Proprietor, Ranjith Roadlines Versus The Commissioner, State GST, The Assistant State Tax Officer
GST
2018 (11) TMI 954 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 385 (Ker.) , [2019] 63 G S.T.R. 70 (Ker)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 12-11-2018
WP(C). No. 35868 of 2018
GST
MR. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU J.
PETITIONERS: BY ADVS. SRI. S. SANTHOSH KUMAR SMT.ANJANA. S. SANTHOSH SMT. P. LISSY JOSE.
RESPONDENTS: DR THUSHARA JAMES, GP.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a registered dealer, purchased certain goods from Chennai. He had them transported to Kerala. When the goods were in transit, the Assistant State Tax Officer (ASTO), for the reasons not germane here, detained the goods and issued the Ext.P3 notice, dated 30.09.2018.
2. Based on the demand in the Ext.P3 notice, the consignor paid the tax and penalty, as is evident from Ext.P4 payment receipt. But the remittance was made under the head 'SGST'.
3. The petit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ll take more than a couple of months.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the Government Pleader.
7. I reckon the facts are not in dispute. The petitioner, as a consignee and transporter, purchased goods from the consignor in Chennai. While those goods were in transit, they were detained. Further not in dispute is the fact that the consignor paid the tax and penalty. Either on the ASTO's advice or on its own, it remitted the amount under the head 'SGST', instead of 'IGST'. In this context, we may refer to Section 77 of the GST Act. And it reads:
Section 77: Tax wrongfully collected and paid to Central Government or State Government:  
(1) A registered person who has paid the Central tax and State tax or, as the case may be, the central tax and the Union territory tax on a transaction considered by him to be an intra-State supply, but which is subsequently held to be an inter-State supply, shall be refunded the amount of taxes so paid in

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

any existing law and the balance amount refundable:
PROVIDED that in cases where the amount of refund is completely adjusted against any outstanding demand under the Act or under any existing law, an order giving details of the adjustment shall be issued in Part A of FORM GST RFD-07.”
(italics supplied)
9. As seen, Section 77 provides for the refund of the tax paid mistakenly under one head instead of another. But Rule 4 speaks of adjustment. Where the amount of refund is completely adjusted against any outstanding demand under the Act, an order giving details of the adjustment is to be issued in Part A of FORM GST RFD-07. The petitioner's counsel lays stress on this process of adjustment and asserts that the amount remitted under one head can be adjusted under another head, for the demand can be any amount under the Act.
10. Under these circumstances, I find no difficulty for the respondent officials to allow the petitioner's request and get the amount transferred from the hea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Kundan Singh Versus State & others
GST
2018 (11) TMI 889 – UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 387 (Uttarakhand)
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 12-11-2018
Writ Petition No. 116 of 2018 (PIL)
GST
RAJIV SHARMA, AND SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA, JJ
Mr. M.C. Pant, Amicus Curiae for the petitioner.
Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
Per: Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, J.
Uttarakhand UPNL Savinda Karamchari Sangh through its General Secretary has filed Impleadment Application No.16484 of 2018 highlighting therein the exploitation of the workmen by the State Government as well as local bodies. It is stated in the application that though, the workmen are being paid the honorarium of Rs. 8,400/-, however, the GST @18% and 2.5% Service Tax are also deducted from their salary. It is also highlighted that the administrative, disciplinary and financial control on each and every employee is of the establishment, in which, they are working. They are disch

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

through UPNL vis-à-vis their regularly appointed counterparts in the government department.
v. The State Government is further directed to give the date of engagement of every employee/workman through UPNL in a tabular form.
vi. The State Government and UPNL are directed to ensure that no displeasure is shown to any person or employee in highlighting the difficulties faced by them.”
4. In sequel to the directions issued by this Court, the State Government has filed the comprehensive affidavit. According to the averments made in the affidavit, the employees have been engaged in the various Government Departments and other institutions/corporations/local bodies etc. through outsource. The Government of Uttarakhand issued G.O. dated 12.06.2013 by which after fixing the categories of the officers/personnel, the honorarium was also fixed for the employees engaged through outsourcing. The honorarium of the personnel sponsored through UPNL was revised on 10.05.2018. The honorarium

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

led, skilled, highly skilled and officers) have been engaged through UPNL.
9. The Cabinet in its meeting held on 20.09.2018 has discussed the matter and decided that the matter is covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of “State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi.” Thus, the persons engaged through UPNL cannot be regularized.
10. It would be apt at this stage to take into consideration the Memorandum and Articles of Association of Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Limited (as amended vide extraordinary General Meeting held on 01.09.2015). The main objects of the company are to provide employment/self employment to Ex-servicemen and their dependants and in case suitable Ex-servicemen/their dependants are not available, employment can be provided to others to meet the requirements of Principal Employer.
11. Thus, it is evident that it is only when suitable Ex-servicemen/their dependants are not available, then the employment could be provided to others to meet

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ntract Labour.
15. “Establishment” means any office or department of the Government of a local authority or any place where any industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation is carried out.
16. “Principal employer” means in relation to any office or department of the Government or a local authority, the head of that office or department or such other officer as the Government or the local authority, as the case may be, may specify in that behalf.  
17. It is evident from the Memorandum and Articles of Association of UPNL, the UPNL was required to provide employment/self-employment to Ex-servicemen and their dependants and in case suitable Ex-servicemen/their dependants are not available employment can be provided to others to meet the requirements of Principal Employer.
18. The State Government in its own wisdom vide letter dated 09.06.2016 had directed that in future UPNL will sponsor ex-servicemen only and thereafter, vide letter dated 05.07.2016 UPNL has been allowed

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Rs. 8,400/-. The persons appointed in the corresponding posts are getting regular pay-scale. The dearness allowance is also not being paid to them.
23. The State must act like a Modal employer. Something which cannot be done directly cannot be permitted to be done indirectly. The agreement entered into between the UPNL and its employees is unconstitutional. Thus, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The employees working through agency of UPNL, deployed by the State Government and local bodies are entitled to at least minimum of pay-scale, which is being paid to their counterparts on the principle of “Equal Pay for Equal Work.” The employees sponsored through UPNL are working without being regularized for decades together. It amounts to begaar.
24. The State Government while filing the affidavit has overlooked Section 2(i)(iv) and 2(z) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
25. In AIR 1964 SC 355, in the case of “M/s Basti Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. Ram Ujagar & ot

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n the sub-clause are clearly sufficient to achieve this purpose.
7. It is true, as pointed out by Mr Pathak, that the definition of the word “workmen” did not contain any words to show that the contract labour was included. That however does not affect the position. The words of the definition of workmen in Section 2(z) to mean “any person (including an apprentice) employed in any industry to do any skilled or unskilled, manual, supervisory, technical or clerical work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or implied” are by themselves sufficiently wide to bring in persons doing work in an industry whether the employment was by the management or by the contractor of the management. Unless however the definition of the word “employer” included the management of the industry even when the employment was by the contractor the workmen employed by the contractor could not get the benefit of the Act since a dispute between them and the management would not be an indu

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

through UPNL is a sham. The Principal Employer is State Government.
27. In 1985 (3) SCC 545, in the case of “Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corp.”, their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have held as under:-
“40. Just as a mala fide act has no existence in the eye of law, even so, unreasonableness vitiates law and procedure alike. It is therefore essential that the procedure prescribed by law for depriving a person of his fundamental right, in this case the right to life, must conform to the norms of justice and fair play. Procedure, which is unjust or unfair in the circumstances of a case, attracts the vice of unreasonableness, thereby vitiating the law which prescribes that procedure and consequently, the action taken under it. Any action taken by a public authority which is invested with statutory powers has, therefore, to be tested by the application of two standards: the action must be within the scope of the authority conferred by law and secondly, it must be reasonabl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

not made them applicable qua persons sponsored by UPNL. In Uma Devi case, their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have directed that the Courts cannot issue directions for framing of scheme but State Governments of their own could frame the scheme for regularization.
29. The action of the State Government of not regularizing the employees sponsored through agency of UPNL and to deny them minimum of pay-scale including dearness allowance is arbitrary and unreasonable.
30. The employees have a legitimate, statutory and fundament rights to be regularized. The workmen are being paid meager honorarium and out of the same, GST and Service Tax are also deducted. Every workman is entitled to living and fair wage to make both ends meet. The UPNL has not obtained the license as Contractor nor has registered under the Act qua most of the departments and local bodies.
31. Salary is the property within the meaning of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. No GST or Service Tax can be d

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

TAYAB ZAINULABDIN Versus ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GST DEPT, KOLLAM
GST
2018 (11) TMI 800 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 12-11-2018
WP(C). No. 36685 of 2018
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The PETITIONER : SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR
For The RESPONDENT : DR THUSHARA JAMES GP
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Act, faced with Exts.P5 and P6 notices under Sections 129(3) and 129(1) of th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax Versus M/s Spice Digital Limited
Service Tax
2018 (11) TMI 761 – PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT – TMI
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 12-11-2018
STA No. 2 of 2018 (O&M)
Service Tax
Mr Rajesh Bindal And Mr Manoj Bajaj, JJ.
For The Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate for Mr. Tajender Joshi, Advocate
For The Respondent : Mr. P. K. Sahu, Advocate And Mr. Manpreet Sawhney, Advocate
ORDER
Rajesh Bindal, J.
This is an appe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Rane Brake Lining Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai North
Central Excise
2018 (11) TMI 735 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 12-11-2018
Appeal No. E/42007/2018 – Final Order No. 42790/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Ms. S. Sridevi and Shri Nitin, Advocates for the Appellant
Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
The appeal is filed by the appellant aggrieved by the disallowance of input tax credit on security services.
2. Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of asbestos brake linings and are availing the facility of CENVAT credit on inputs, input services etc. It was noticed that they had avail

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y. She submitted that the appellants have to remove as well as store the hazardous waste as per the Hazardous Waste Rules and also the guidelines issued by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. Therefore, it is required by them to engage the security at the area where the hazardous waste is stored and the disallowance of credit is unjustified and prayed that the same may be allowed.
4. The ld. AR Shri B. Balamurugan supported the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that the security services is in a place which is not within the premises of the factory and has no nexus with the manufacturing activity. That the disallowance of credit is legal and proper.
5. Heard both sides.
6. The ld. counsel has argued that as per the legal r

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Corrigendum – Notification No. 60/2018-Central Tax, dated the 30th October, 2018
F. No. CBEC/20/06/17/2018-GST Dated:- 12-11-2018 Central GST (CGST)
GST
CGST
CGST
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Excise and Customs
Corrigendum
New Delhi, the 12th November, 2018
G.S.R. (E).:- In the notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, No. 60/2018-Central Tax, dated the 30th October, 2018, pub

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

E-procurement transaction fee is considered a supply under GST but exempt due to a specific notification.
Case-Laws
GST
Liability of GST – e-procurement Transaction Fee collected on behalf of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Supplies to Merchant, Navy, and Coast Guard Ships Deemed Exports, Qualify as Zero-Rated Under GST Rules.
Case-Laws
GST
Zero rated supplies under GST – The outward supplies made by the applica

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Small Business Can Choose to Continue or Cancel GSTIN if Turnover Below Rs. 20 Lakhs: Section 29 APGST Act 2017.
Case-Laws
GST
Migration from VAT to GST – Since the applicant reported that hi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Advisory to UIN Entities claiming GST Refunds
GST
Dated:- 10-11-2018

The GST Act provides for allotting a Unique Identification Number (UIN) to Consulates, Embassies and other UN Organizations to enable such entities to claim refund of GST paid. One of the conditions for claiming this refund is to file Invoice Level Data in their FORM GSTR-11 on the common portal. There are common discrepancies which have been noticed by GST Authorities while processing refund applications.
FORM GSTR-11 under Rule 82 of the CGST Rules, 2017 mandates reporting “Place of Supply” for every invoice on which refund is applied for. Many UIN entities while filling invoice data have been reporting their place of supply as the State where they are reg

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

No input tax credit for goods and services used in plant and machinery installation under CGST Act section 17(5).
Case-Laws
GST
Input tax credit – Goods which are used for installation (Found

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST 5% Applies to Cut Eucalyptus and Subabul Wood for Paper Mill Pulp Manufacturing.
Case-Laws
GST
The supply of Eucalyptus / Subabul wood de-barked pulp wood in cut sizes, supplied to variou

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Animal Feed Supplement Classified Under HSN Code 23099090 Exempt from GST.
Case-Laws
GST
Biofos Mono calcium Phosphate/Di calcium phosphate animal feed supplement”, HSN Code No: 23099090, i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Extend the time limit for furnishing the declaration in FORM GST ITC-04.
GST-I/2018/3 Dated:- 9-11-2018 Punjab SGST
GST – States
Punjab SGST
Punjab SGST
GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB
DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE AND TAXATION
Bhupindra Road, Patiala, Punjab.
ORDER
The 9th November, 2018
No. GST-I/2018/3-State.-In pursuance of section 168 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Punjab Act No.5 of 2017) and sub-rule (3) of rule 45 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereina

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY (INDIA) LTD. Versus THE STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, STATE TAX OFFICER (ENQUIRY) OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSMT.), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
VAT and Sales Tax
2018 (11) TMI 718 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 9-11-2018
WP (C).No. 36426 of 2018
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The Petitioner : ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.), SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS, SRI.ISAAC THOMAS, SRI.P.G.CHANDAPILLAI ABRAHAM AND SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS
For The Respondent : GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, dealing in elevators, enters into works contract with persons in State

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ded bank guarantee and got the goods released. Recently, the second respondent passed the Ext.P9 to P20 orders to adjust the security deposits the petitioner earlier furnished towards the penalty. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
4. The learned Senior Counsel has contended that the entire transaction falls beyond the mischief of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. So, as it is an inter-state sale, the petitioner has already paid the sales tax as is evident from Ext.P4.
5. On the Exts.P9 to P20 orders under the KVAT Act, the learned Senior Counsel agrees that the petitioner has an alternative remedy. Yet he asserts that the second respondent lacks jurisdiction over the transaction and, therefore, those orders are nonest.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

mitted that before the petitioner could approach the revision authority, the respondent authorities will encash the Bank guarantee to the petitioner's prejudice. I reckon there is force in his contention.
Under these circumstances, without adverting to the merits, I dispose of the writ petition, holding that the petitioner is free to invoke Section 57, or any other statutory provision, to seek redressal against the Ext.P9 to P20 orders. But as the petitioner has bona fide approached this Court, and now its approaching the revision authority may take some time; it serves the interest of justice if the petitioner is provided breathing time. Therefore, the authorities will defer encashing the bank guarantee for two months.
Case laws,

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

New Initiative Enhances e-Filing for GST Compliance: Streamlined Processes, Timely Updates, and Alerts for Taxpayers.
Circulars
GST – States
Providing various e-Filing facility to Taxpayers f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Amendement in GST Registration
Query (Issue) Started By: – Shreyansh Agrawal Dated:- 8-11-2018 Last Reply Date:- 12-11-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Dear Sir/ Madam,
We have only one business which are registered under GST, now we have to open Second business which are totally different from first business but under same pan and also in same state. There are no additional option available to show second business under trade name nor additional option available to show principle place of business. How we can do amendment under existing registration???
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Pl. go through this:-
SECTION 28. Amendment of registration. – (1) Every registered person and a person to w

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

iving the person an opportunity of being heard.
(3) Any rejection or approval of amendments under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be a rejection or approval under this Act.
Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN:
The Reply:
In my view registration cannot be amended since the second business is separate from the erstwhile business.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
There was proposal to change the definition of 'business vertical' for the purpose of single registration in the same State but that change has not been brought. Also see the following rule which supports the views Dr.Govindarajan, Sir.
RULE 11. Separate registration

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ch person shall pay tax under the Act on supply of goods or services or both made to another registered business vertical of such person and issue a tax invoice for such supply.
Explanation. – For the purposes of clause (b), it is hereby clarified that where any business vertical of a registered person that has been granted a separate registration becomes ineligible to pay tax under section 10, all other business verticals of the said person shall become ineligible to pay tax under the said section.
(2) A registered person eligible to obtain separate registration for business verticals may submit a separate application in FORM GST REG-01* in respect of each such vertical.
(3) The provisions of rule 9 and rule 10 relating to the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Job Work Services for Foreign Principals at Applicant's Premises Subject to 18% GST Rate per Specifications.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – job work – The process providing job work service to t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Items for Solar Cell Production Not GST-Eligible as 'Parts for Manufacture' Under Current Classification Rules.
Case-Laws
GST
Classification – Rate of GST – The items used for manufacture of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Government-Owned SPV's Consultancy Services for Transport Studies Exempt from GST Under Article 243.
Case-Laws
GST
Government authority – SPV with 100% government holding – The consultancy services for preparation of transport studies such as comprehensive mobility plan, transit oriented development plan, NMT plan and consultancy services of transaction advisors/preparation of DPRs comes within the purview of the functions of Municipality under article 243 – No GST
TMI Updates – Hig

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tobacco Leaves as Agricultural Produce: Commission Agent Services and Auction Sales Exempt from GST.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – Undoubtedly, tobacco leaves are agricultural produce – The ser

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Can Restaurant Can Claim on input
Query (Issue) Started By: – YUWRAJ KOTHARI Dated:- 8-11-2018 Last Reply Date:- 12-11-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Dear Sir/Madam,
Can Restaurant holding Franchise, and leving GST on Foods Sales @5%, claim ITC for Royalty or any other input.
Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN:
The Reply:
In my view no.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
I support the view of Dr.Govindarajan, Sir.
Reply By CAHemanth Kumar B:
The Reply:
De

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

REFUND OF GST AGAINST INVERTED DUTY STRUCTURE
Query (Issue) Started By: – SAFETAB LIFESCIENCE Dated:- 8-11-2018 Last Reply Date:- 13-11-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 16 Replies
GST
Dear Experts,
We have obtained refund of accumulated GST against inverted duty structure in March-2018 for the period of earlier months. The refund included ITC credited against goods (inputs) and services. Now we have been instructed to repay the refund received against input services against Notification No. 26/2018 dt. 13.06.2018 retrospective effect from 01.07.2017.
Now, my query is shall reverse the demanded amount from Electronic Credit Ledger today as I have sufficient balance now or I have to pay only in Cash Ledger. I think this reversal of GST is eligible for re-credit of ITC as the Department has not denied the credit and denied only the refund. If I pay cash in Cash Ledger, shall I use the amount for offset of GST payment immediately in the same month itself.
Reply By KAST

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

dit ledger will be complete. Also, this is not the correct solution but best solution available.
With due respect to you and expert comment above, there is no question of re credit above. There is no Refund claim pending and ITC portion available with officer to “re credit” the same as, re credit is only allowed on basis of order RFD 01B and nothing else. I have assumed you have already received RFD 06.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Electronic Cash Ledger is equal to erstwhile PLA (Personal Ledger Account). In this account an assessee deposits tax amount through e-challan and debits from the same to transfer in Central Govt. Account. Anyhow, the ball is in the court of the Department.
Reply By SHIVKUMAR SHARMA:
The Reply:
I agree with Shri Nandan Khambete.
Reply By SAFETAB LIFESCIENCE:
The Reply:
Dear Sirs,
We have not received any SCN for this u/s 73 or 74.
We received refund under order RFD-06 only.
We do not want to go for appeal.
We can pay in Cash Ledger and make u

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nic Cash Ledger.
After repayment of this amount in cash through Electronic Cash Ledger, the entry of re-credit of this very amount is required in Electronic Credit Ledger and, thereafter, you can use it for offsetting liability in GSTR 3B in the same month. Re-credit of the same is your substantive right.The availment of credit of input service is not under challenge.
I am sure you understand the formula for sanction of refund very well.
Reply By SAFETAB LIFESCIENCE:
The Reply:
Dear Mr. Kasthuri Seithi,
Once I paid cash and if it comes in Cash Ledger, then why I need to take in Credit Ledger.
Already that amount will be in Cash Ledger and availble for offsetting. If I take again in
Credit Ledger the very same amount as you told, it may double credit, Am I right.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
I fail to understand your first query dated 8.11.18. There are some confusion in it.
Reply By Nandan Khambete:
The Reply:
Amount cannot be recredited from Cash Ledger to Credit L

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ted(inadmissible) while sanctioning final Refund in RFD 06. As per my limited experience and understanding, it cannot be issued after RFD 06 is issued with no rejection a dn that to since not claim amount is held back and that too after 6 months of RFD 06.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Sh.Nandan Khambete Ji, Sir, I agree with you to the extent that the amount of sanctioned refund cannot be recovered from the party after six months as explained by you inasmuch as the party is not at fault at all. Thus the remaining issues are relegated to the background. I also agree with your logic that the party must not rrepay the amount without letter or SCN irrespective of the fact whether the amount is small or huge. To repay the amount of sanctioned refund in view of retrospective amendment and that too after the expiry of six months is unconstitutional. When the department is on weak wicket regarding merits/legal aspect, the department tries to recover through persuasive strategy. It appe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST on CSR funds received.
Query (Issue) Started By: – Vijay Kumar Dated:- 8-11-2018 Last Reply Date:- 14-11-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
Respected experts, One of my client regd under GST under service provider category issued non GST invoice ( without GST) for CSR funds received from a trust. Is there any exemption available for Such funds recd from paying GST ? Trust from whom CSR funds recd is not willing to pay GST. Kindly guide me., I shall be highly tha

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =