Goods and Services Tax

2018 (7) TMI 1494 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS HARYANA – 2018 (15) G. S. T. L. 127 (A. A. R. – GST) – Taxability – packing to be considered as unit container or not? – Frozen Meat sold in packaged form – rate of tax – inter-state supplies of goods.
–
What is the classification when frozen meat is sold in packaged form and its HSN code? – What is the rate of tax on frozen meat sold by the company?
–
Held that:- The items mentioned in tariff heading 0204 or 0207 [other than fresh or chilled] would be exigible to tax @ 5% if these are put up in a 'unit container' and bears a brand name or bears a brand name on which actionable claim or enforceable right in court of law is available [other than those where any actionable claim or enforceable right in respect of such brand name has been foregone voluntarily], subject to conditions as in the annexure I to the said notification – In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Integrated Goods and Servic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

HDPE bags having mention of varying actual total weight of the carcasses packed in each such HDPE bags and supplied to Army shall not qualify as product put up in 'Unit Container'.
–
The product fall under exemption list as per entry no. 10 of notification No. 2/2017-lntegrated tax (Rate) dated 20 June 2017 upto 14th November 2017 and thereafter as per entry No. 9 of Notification No. 44/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated November 2017. – HAR/HAAR/R/2017-18/10 Dated:- 1-6-2018 – Sangeeta Karmakar Member CGST and Vijay Kumar Singh Member SGST ADVANCE RULING NO.HAR/HAAR/R/2017-18/10 (In Application No.: 10, dated 06.03.2018) Present for the Applicant: Sh. Gourav Gupta C.A. and Sh. Neeraj Present for the department: Sh. Rakesh Dahiya, ETO, Mewat. Factual Background M/s. Gitwako Farms (India) Pvt. Ltd supplies to Army and Para Military Forces sheep/goat meat in carcasses of different weight and size in frozen State. Each frozen carcass is put in LDPE bag (primary packing) which is seale

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n meat backed in PDPE bags in the shape of unit container. Since the applicant is supplying his goods packed in bags hence it qualifies as supply of goods in unit container and 12% GST is applicable. Record of Personal Hearing The applicant was afforded a personal hearing for 24.05.2018. The issue raised by the applicant for advance ruling, whether their product can be said to be packed in a unit container to fall under the scope of notification no. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) and 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 or notification no. 2/2017 -Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017. is covered under the scope of section 97 of CGST/HGST Act 2017 and therefore, the application was admitted. As regard the classification of their product, the departmental representative had stated that the applicant firm is packing the animal carcasses in bags for supplying to their customers, i.e. Army, in unit containers and therefore it attracts GST @ 12%. The applicant had strongly argued that th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of sheep or goats, frozen and put up in unit containers A reading of the above entry in the above mentioned notification would reveal that if the items mentioned in Tariff heading 0204 are frozen and put up in a 'unit container, it would be exigible to tax @12%. Correspondingly, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, the Central Government vide notification no. 2/2017-lntegrated Tax (rate) New Delhi dated 28.06.2017 has exempted, Inter-State supplies of goods, from the whole of the Integrated Tax leviable thereon. Relevant extract is reproduced below: Schedule- Sr. No. Chapter/Heading/Sub-heading/Tariff item Description of Goods 10. 0204 Meat of sheep or goats, [other than frozen and put up in unit containers] W.e.f. from 15th November 2017 onwards. Schedule I of the Notification no. 43/2017-Integrated Tax (rate) dated 14th November, 2017 deals with the products which are subject to 5% GST and entry No

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

een foregone voluntarily], subject to conditions as in the annexure I to the said notification. Correspondingly, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 the Central Government via notification no. 44/2017 Integrated Tax (rate) New Delhi dated 14.11.2017 has exempted, Inter-State supplies of goods, from the whole of the integrated tax leviable thereon. Relevant extract is reproduced below: Schedule- Sr.No. Chapter/Heading/Sub- heading/Tariff item Description of Goods 8 0204 0207 All goods, fresh or chilled 7. 0204 0207 All goods (other than fresh or chilled) other than those put up in unit container and,- (a) bearing a registered brand name; or (b) bearing a brand name on which actionable claim or enforceable right in court of law is available [other than those where any actionable claim or enforceable right in respect of such brand name has been foregone voluntarily], subject to conditions as in the annexure

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t that they supply to Army sheep/goat meat in carcasses of different weight and size in frozen State. Each frozen carcass is put in LDPE bag (primary packing) which is sealed with a tie and no weight is mentioned on such LDPE bags. Thereafter, generally two of such LDPE bags are put in HDPE bags (secondary packing) and the weight of both the packed carcasses is mentioned on the secondary packing. Thus, the packing of the frozen carcasses done by them is only a medium of delivery and since these are not in pre-determined units, these packing cannot be termed as 'Unit Containers'. To substantiate their view regarding unit container the applicant had cited several case laws. Reliance is placed on the case of CCE Vs Shalimar Super Foods [2007 (210) ELT 695 (Tri.-Mumbai] and Surya Agro Oils Ltd. vs CCE, Indore, 2000 (116) ELT 514. In of CCE Vs Shalimar Super Foods [2007 (210) ELT 695 (Tri.-Mumbai] the Hon'ble bench had considered the question of 'Unit Container' and obse

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

packaging of frozen sheep/goat carcasses for delivery in primary LDPE bags further packed in secondary HDPE bags of non-standardised quantity done by the applicant cannot be regarded as 'Unit Container' since it is not standardised to hold a uniform predetermined quantity. Also in the explanation appended to the Notification No. 1/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 a unit container means a package, whether large or small (for example tin, can, jar, box, bottle, bag, carton, drum, barrel or canister) designed to hold a pre-determined quantity or number, which is indicated on such package. The explanation itself suggests that the make of the container should be such which can hold a predetermined quantity or number. It should be such that when packed it holds the predetermined quantity or the number for which it is designed. As shown to us the packaging by the applicant can weigh 10 Kgs or 11 Kgs or for that matter 10.5 or 10.25 Kgs depending upon the weight of two f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (7) TMI 519 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – Valuation – inclusion of VAT / CST subsidy in assessable value – Held that:- The issue decided in the case of M/S. UNIVERSAL CABLES LTD. APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF GST, CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS, JABALPUR [2018 (3) TMI 1229 – CESTAT, NEW DELHI], where it was held that there is no justification for inclusion in the assessable value, the VAT amounts paid by the assessee using VAT 37B Challans – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal No. E/50872/2018-CU[DB] – A/52268/2018-EX[DB] – Dated:- 1-6-2018 – Mr. Bijay Kumar, Member (Technical) And Ms. Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial) Represented by Ms. Priyanka Goel, Advocate for the Appellant. Represented by Shri R.K. Mishra, D.R. for t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ral Excise duty on the availment of subsidies. Resultantly, the demand thereof was confirmed vide the order dated 30.03.2017 and was also upheld vide the order under challenge. 2. We have heard Ms. Priyanka Goel for the Appellant, and Sh. R.K. Mishra, learned D.R. for the Department. Learned counsels have mentioned that the matter has already been decided by the Tribunal vide the Order dated 09.05.2018 in the case of M/s Shriji Polymers I. Ltd. & others vs. CCE&ST, Indore in Appeal No. E/50813-50815/2018 [Final Order No. 51741-51743/2018 dated 09.05.2018]. Relying upon the case of M/s Pioneer Engineer Industries vs. CCE, Indore, 2018 (3) TMI 1229 – Cestat, New Delhi and following the said both the orders, we hereby set aside the ord

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (6) TMI 1413 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI – CENVAT Credit – input services – capital goods – Marine Insurance services – Air Travel Agent’s services – capital goods cleared without being used as such – extended period of limitation – Held that:- This appeal can be disposed of only on the ground of limitation.
–
SCN is issued on 17.05.2016 for the various transactions on availment of CENVAT credit during the period May, 2013 to March, 2015. It is undisputed that the appellants were regular in filing the monthly returns with the authorities.
–
The Audit reports submitted by the Learned Counsel are for period January, 2013 to December, 2013 audited during the period 26.01.2014 and 28.01.2014 and audit reports for January, 2014 to December, 2014 audited on 06.01.2015 – 21.01.2015. The said audit reports did not indicate any of the allegations made in the present show cause notice. It is also seen from the said show cause notice dated 17.05.2016, the basis for issuance of show cau

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding eligibility to avail CENVAT credit of service tax paid on Marine Insurance services which were used for export of finished goods exported and Air Travel Agent s services used for business travel of directors for sales promotion; reversal of CENVAT credit availed on the capital goods cleared without being used as such and whether invocation of extended period as correct or otherwise. 4. The appellant herein had availed CENVAT credit of service tax paid on Marine Insurance service and Air Travel Agent s service during the period May, 2013 to March, 2015 and had availed the CENVAT credit of Central Excise Duty paid on compressors which were imported during the period 2013. Appellants were filing returns regularly with the authorities. A Show cause notice was issued for the demand of reversal of CENVAT credit availed on Marine Insurance and Air Travel Agent s services, on a ground that these services ar

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he memorandum of appeal. It is his further submission that the entire demand is hit by limitation as the show cause notice is issued on 17.05.2016 invoking the extended period, in spite of the fact that two audit parties have taken place in the appellant s premises and draws my attention to the audit report the copy annexed to the returns submitted today. 6. The matter was kept today for hearing arguments of Learned Departmental Representative. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand reiterates the findings of the lower authorities and submits that Marine Policy is for the goods cleared from factory as also up to the place of destination in foreign countries and the place of removal, it is settled in the case of Contship Container Lines Ltd., Vs. D.K. Lall [2013 (297) ELT 321] wherein, Hon ble Apex Court has stated that seller does not reverse any right or lien qua on the impugned goods. 7. On careful consideration of submissions made by both sides, I find that this appea

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – 009/2018-GST – Dated:- 1-6-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX ASSAM KAR BHAWAN NOTIFICATION No. 9/2018-GST Date 1st June, 2018 NO.CT/GST-14/2017/124.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section 48 of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Assam Act No. XXVIII of 2017), read with sub-rule (3) of rule 83 of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, the Commissioner, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – 010/2018-GST – Dated:- 1-6-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX ASSAM KAR BHAWAN NOTIFICATION No. 10/2018-GST Date: 1st June, 2018 No. CT/GST-14/2017/128.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (6) of section 39 of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, (Assam Act No. XXVIII of 2017) (hereafter in this notification referred to as "the said Act") and in supersession of notification No. CT/GST-14/2017/

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – States – G.O.Ms. NO.108 – Dated:- 1-6-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION G.O.Ms. NO.108, DATED 1-6-2018 In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 164 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No.23 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following Rules further to amend the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely: (1) These Rules may be called the Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2018. (2) Save as otherwise provided, they shall deemed to have come into force with effect from 18th day of April, 2018. 2. In the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017,- (i) in rule 89, for sub-rule (5), the following shall be substituted, namely: "(5) In the case of refund on account of inverted duty structure, refund of input tax credit shall be granted as per the following formula:- Maximum Refund Amount = {(Turnover of inverted rated supply of goods and services) x Net ITC÷ Adju

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ax Act, 2017, shall be deposited in the Fund. (2) Where any amount, having been credited to the Fund, is ordered or directed to be paid to any claimant by the proper officer, appellate authority or court, the same shall be paid from the Fund. (3) Accounts of the Fund maintained by the Government shall be subject to audit by the Principal Accountant General, Telangana. (4) The Government shall, by an order, constitute a Standing Committee (hereinafter referred to as the 'Committee') with a Chairman, a Vice-Chairman, a Member Secretary and such other members as it may deem fit and the Committee shall make recommendations for proper utilisation of the money credited to the Fund for welfare of the consumers. (5) (a) The Committee shall meet as and when necessary, generally four times in a year; (b) the Committee shall meet at such time and place as the Chairman, or in his absence, the Vice-Chairman of the Committee may deem fit; (c) the meeting of the Committee shall be presided ov

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

allow entry and inspection of any premises, from which activities claimed to be for the welfare of consumers are stated to be carried on, to a duly authorised officer of the State Government, as the case may be; (d) to get the accounts of the applicants audited, for ensuring proper utilisation of the grant; (e) to require any applicant, in case of any default, or suppression of material information on his part, to refund in lump-sum alongwith accrued interest, the sanctioned grant to the Committee, and to be subject to prosecution under the Act; (f) to recover any sum due from any applicant in accordance with the provisions of the Act; (g) to require any applicant, or class of applicants to submit a periodical report, indicating proper utilisation of the grant; (h) to reject an application placed before it on account of factual inconsistency, or inaccuracy in material particulars; (i) to recommend minimum financial assistance, by way of grant to an applicant, having regard to his fina

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

cation; (d) making available grants for any other purpose recommended by the Central Consumer Protection Council (as may be considered appropriate by the Committee); (e) making available up to 50% of the funds credited to the Fund each year, for publicity/consumer awareness on GST, provided the availability of funds for consumer welfare activities of the Department of Consumer Affairs is not less than five crore rupees per annum. Explanation.- For the purposes of this rule, (a) 'applicant' means,- (i) the Central Government or State Government; (ii) regulatory authorities or autonomous bodies constituted under an Act of Parliament or Legislature of the State; (iii) any agency or organization engaged in consumer welfare activities for a minimum period of three years, registered under the Companies Act, 2013 (Central Act 18 of 2013) or under any other law for the time being in force; (iv) Gram Panchayat or Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad or Samiti level co-operatives of consume

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n Act, 1986 (68 of 1986), for promotion and protection of rights of consumers; (d) 'Committee' means the Committee constituted under sub-rule (4); (e) 'Consumer' has the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (68 of 1986), and includes consumer of goods on which central tax has been paid; (f) 'Fund' means the Consumer Welfare Fund established by the State Government under section 57 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (19 of 2017); (g) 'Proper Officer' means the officer having the power under the Act to make an order that the whole or any part of the state tax is refundable.". (iii) in FORM GST ITC-03, after entry 5 (e), for the instruction against the expression "**", the following shall be substituted, namely:"** The value of capital goods shall be the invoice value reduced by 1/60th per month or part thereof from the date of invoice"; (iv)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 (a) Inputs held in stock (where invoice is available) 8 (b) Inputs contained in semi-finished or finished goods held in stock (where invoice is available) 8 (c) Capital goods/plant and machinery held in stock 8 (d) Inputs held in stock or inputs as contained in semi-finished /finished goods held in stock ( where invoice is not available) 9. Amount of tax payable and paid (based on Table 8) Sr. No . Description ITC reversible/T ax payable Tax paid along with application for cancellation of registration (GST REG-16) Balance tax payable (3-4) Amount paid through debit to electronic cash ledger Amount paid through debit to electronic credit ledger Central Tax State/ Union territory Tax Integrated Tax Cess 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1. Central Tax 2. State/Union territory Tax 3. Integrated Tax 4. Cess 10. Interest, late fee payable and paid Description Amount payable Amount Paid 1 2 3 (I) Interest on account of (a) Integrated Tax (b) Central Tax (c) State/Union territory Ta

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

taken care of while providing details of stock at Sl. No.8: (i) where the tax invoices related to the inputs held in stock or inputs contained in semi-finished or finished goods held in stock are not available, the registered person shall estimate the amount under sub-rule (3) of rule 44 based on prevailing market price of the goods; (ii) in case of capital goods/ plant and machinery, the value should be the invoice value reduced by 1/60th per month or part thereof from the date of invoice/purchase taking useful life as five years. 4. The details furnished in accordance with sub-rule (3) of rule 44 in the Table at Sl. No. 8 (against entry 8 (d)) shall be duly certified by a practicing chartered accountant or cost accountant. Copy of the certificate shall be uploaded while filing the details.] (v) for FORM GST DRC-07, the following shall be substituted, namely:- 2[FORM GST DRC – 07 [See rule 142(5)] Summary of the order 1. Details of order – (a) Order No. (b) Order date (c) Tax period –

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (6) TMI 784 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – Penalty u/r 26 of CER – allegation against the appellants are that they have facilitated the fraudulent availment of Cenvat credit to the main noticee viz. M/s Ujala Electricals Ltd. – period involved in this case is from 2005-2006 to 2008-2009 – Held that:- The penal provision under sub-rule 2 of Rule 26 was not there in existence for the period 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 and only available for the period after 1.3.2007 – the penalty cannot be imposed for the period prior to 1.3.2007, the date on which sub-rule (2) was inserted in Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 vide Notification No. 8/2007-CE(NT) dated 1.3.2007 for issuing invoices without delivery of goods and also for abetting in issuing such invoices.
–
These aspects need to be relooked into by the ld. Adjudicating authority – appeal allowed by way of remand. – Appeal No. E/52137/2016-SM, E/52153/2016, E/52143/2016, E/52842/2016 – A/52094-52097/2018-SM[BR] – Dated:- 1-6-2018 – Sh

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ter dated 12.12.2014 submitting the copies of ledger in the defence reply has not been considered and discussed by the ld. Adjudicating Authority while passing the impugned order. The ledger, as stated by the ld. Advocate, is a crucial document for the verification of the transactions in question. Further, the order is based on the third party statement without any corroborative evidence. That there is no dispute that the goods were cleared by the appellant but the allegation that those are diverted en-route to have been not investigated and discussed by the ld. Adjudicating authority. Also that the transactions with M/s Ujala Electricals Ltd. by the banking channel and there is no evidence of any financial flow back to the appellant. Ld. Advocate further relied upon the decision of M/s Z.U. Alvi Vs. CCE, Bhopal – 2000 (117) ELT 69 (Tribunal ) and Manohar Singh Rana Vs. CCE, Indore – 2017 (357) ELT 1163 (Tri.-Delhi) The last but not least, the ld. Advocate has stated that the penalty h

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ply of the goods and, therefore, facilitated the availment of the wrong Cenvat credit which is contrary to the provision of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. 4. Heard both the parties and considered the case record. 5. The only issue involved in the present case is regarding imposition of penalty of ₹ 25 lakhs each under the provisions of Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 as a co-noticee, for the fraudulent availment of Cenvat credit by M/s Ujala Electricals Ltd. The period involved in this case is from 2005-2006 to 2008-2009. The penal provision under sub-rule 2 of Rule 26 was not there in existence for the period 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 and only available for the period after 1.3.2007. Also, the ledger submitted by the noticees appears to have been not considered by the ld. Adjudicating authority which, as per the ld. Advocate, is a crucial piece of evidence to prove the innocence of the appellant. It also settled by the judicial decision of Hon ble Haryana High Court and this Tri

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (6) TMI 783 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – CENVAT credit – Rule 4(1) of CCR – entitlement of credit after crossing the SSI Exemption limit – Revenue entertained a view that inasmuch as Rule 4(1) allowed availment of credit only within a period of six months from the date of issuance of the documents, the appellants were not entitled to avail the credit on the basis of more than six months old bills of entry – Principles of harmonious construction and interpretation of rule – Held that:- Admittedly, the appellants were not in a position to avail the credit immediately on receipt of the goods or within a period of six months from the issuance of bills of entry, as long as they were working under the small scale exemption notification. Their right to avail the credit would arise only on crossing the exemption limit. Such right specifically stands extended to them by the provisions of Rule 3(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules and cannot be extinguished by making reference to Rule 4(1).
–

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

er facts on record, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of marble slabs out of the imported marble slabs. During the period prior to February, 2015, they were availing the benefit of small scale exemption Notification. The exemption limit of value of clearances was crossed by them in February, 2015 and as such in terms of provisions of rule 3(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, they became entitled to avail cenvat credit of duty paid on the inputs lying in stock or in process or inputs contained in the final product lying in stock. There is no dispute about the said fact. 3. Accordingly, the appellant availed the credit of the inputs lying in stock, either as such or as contained in their final product on the date of crossing of their exemption limit. The said credit was availed on the basis of bills of entry vide which the raw material was imported by them. However, by the time the appellant crossed the exemption limit and started working under the cenvat scheme, the said bills

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

il cenvat credit as soon as the unit crosses threshold limit, Rule 4(1) prescribes particular condition for availment of that credit. If, a condition under Rule 4 specifically disallows cenvat credit on a particular goods or service, the cenvat credit cannot be allowed under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 7. I find that the case laws quoted by the appellant are not relevant in the present case. These case laws are applicable when there are two beneficial legislations and assessee can avail either of them. In this case, as held above both rules can be applied simultaneously . 5. After hearing both the sides, I find that there is no dispute about the appellant s entitlement to avail the credit of the inputs lying in stock as on the date of their crossing the exemption limit, in terms of Rule 3(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. There is also no dispute about the quantum of inputs lying in stock, either as such or as contained in final product lying in stock. The only objectio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hether an assessee is already working under the cenvat credit scheme and is availing the cenvat on regular basis. A harmonious interpretation of both the rules leads to the above conclusion. By referring to one provision of law, the other provision cannot be made otiose, as per the settled principle of interpretation. It is not the appellant s fault that they crossed the exemption limit after the period of six months from the date of receipt of the inputs. It is also well settled principle of interpretation that a particular provision of law should not be interpreted in a manner so as to render the other provision as inapplicable or ineffective. Substantive right provided under the law cannot be denied by referring to other provision, if such substantive right is otherwise available to an assessee. 7. In such a scenario, by adopting the principles of harmonious construction and interpretation of rule, I hold that the appellant right to avail the credit at the time of coming out of the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (6) TMI 782 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – Clandestine removal – the entire case of the Revenue is based upon the sole factor that M/s. Vishal Packaging Industries could not establish that during the relevant period, they had entered into an agreement with either M/s. V K Enterprises and M/s. Tambi Powerloom Ltd. – Held that:- This factor by itself cannot lead to conclusion that present appellant had cleared PET bottles in the guise of PET preform without payment of duty – It is well settled law that allegations and findings of clandestine removal are required to be made on the basis of positive evidence and cannot be upheld merely on doubts. There is virtually no evidence on record to show as to who were the transporters and buyers of cl

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nvolving duty of ₹ 22,525/- were detected, which the appellants accepted and paid the duty. The said issue is not under challenge. 3. Further, it was found that the appellants were sending PET performs, manufactured by them to their job worker M/s. Vishal Packaging Industries in terms of Notification No. 83/95-CE dated 11.4.1994. The said performs were being further used by M/s. Vishal Packaging Industries for manufacture of PET bottles. 4. The factory of M/s. Vishal Packaging Industries was also visited by the officers on 17.8.2001 and it was found that there was no machinery installed in their factory for manufacture of bottles. Shri Govind Ram Bhojak, authorized signatory of M/s. Vishal Packaging Industries, in his statement dated

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

there was no rent agreement with the said units and as such, entertained a view that M/s. Vishal Packaging Industries was not manufacturing the bottles, which were actually manufactured by the appellant and were cleared in the guise of preforms. 6. On the above basis, proceedings were initiated against the appellant alleging clandestine removal of the PET bottles and proposing to confirm the duty along with interest and imposition of penalties. The proceedings resulted in passing of present impugned orders. Hence, the present appeal. 7. After hearing both the sides, duly represented by Ms. Surabhi Sinha, learned representative of the appellant and Shri P Juneja, learned representative of the Revenue, I find that the entire case of the Reve

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (6) TMI 245 – CESTAT CHANDIGARH – TMI – CENVAT credit – demand of 6% of the value of exempted goods (waste cleared at nil rate of duty) – manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted goods – non-maintenance of separate records of inputs – Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 – CBEC Circular No. 845/3/2007-CE dated 01.02.2007 – Held that:- The case of the Appellant is that they are availing proportionate cenvat credit at the end of the month. The said fact was bought in the knowledge of the adjudicating authority but the adjudicating authority has not given any heed to consider the same and in casual manner the adjudicating authority passed the order – the ld. Commissioner (A) has not given any finding to the claim made by the appellant that they are availing proportionate cenvat credit of inputs used in manufacture goods at the end of the month.
–
It is required to be examined by the authorities below whether the appellant is availing proportionate cenvat credit of input

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

clearing waste without payment of duty as waste is having nil rate of duty. During the course of audit, it was alleged that the appellant is not maintaining separate account for inputs used in manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted goods, therefore, on the value of the waste cleared by the appellant, the appellant is required to pay 6% of the value of the said waste. In these set of facts, the show cause notice was issued to the appellant to demand the amount as discussed above. The matter was adjudicated and the demand was confirmed along with interest and penalty was also imposed. Against the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. The ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that in reply to the show cause notice, the appellant has clarified that they are falling the guidelines given by the Circular No. 845/3/2007-CE dated 01.02.2007. As per the said circular, the appellant is availing cenvat credit only in respect of the inputs used in manufacture of goods cleared under Notifi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hat textile manufacture/processors have to use common inputs, which are used in a continuous manner, and it may not be practically possible to segregate and store inputs like dyes and chemicals separately or maintain separate accounts. In such cases, in order to facilitate simultaneously availment of the two notifications, such manufactures may be advised not to take credit initially and instead take only proportionate input credit on input credit on inputs used in the manufacture of finished goods cleared by him on payment of duty. Such proportionate credit should be taken at the end of the month only. 7. The case of the Appellant is that they are availing proportionate cenvat credit at the end of the month. The said fact was bought in the knowledge of the adjudicating authority but the adjudicating authority has not given any heed to consider the same and in casual manner the adjudicating authority passed the order demanding value of 6% of the waste cleared at nil rate of duty. In th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Riya Jain – Dated:- 31-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 1-6-2018 – Hey!!Mine is a pharmaceutical company wherein tax rate on outward supply is 12%. Also we manufacture on job work basis where outward tax rate is 18% . Nd input tax rate is 18%. So whether i am eligible for inverted duty structure refund?? – Reply By CSSANJAY MALHOTRA – The Reply = Yes, you are eligible for Inverted structure refund but limited to your turnover from pharma clearances and not in re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – As per the decision of the GST Council, e-Way Bill system for inter-State movement of goods has been rolled out from 01st April, 2018. As on 30th May, 2018, e-Way Bill system for intra-State movement of goods has been rolled out in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Telangana, Tripura, Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh along with the Union Territories of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Chandigarh, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu, Lakshadweep and Puducherry. E-Way Bills are getting generated successfully and till 30t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – S.C. WADHWA – Dated:- 31-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 2-6-2018 – Services by way of renting of residential dwelling for use as residence. Please clarify: Whether this service should be reported as exempted supply or nil rated supply in GSTR 3B – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, In my point of view , it shall be treated as Nil rated supply .Our experts may correct me if mistaken.Thanks – Reply By CSSANJAY MALHOTRA – The Reply = Renting of property is taxable activity but exemption has been given if the same is used for Residential purposes. Hence the service falls under exempted supply. Nil rated are those which are absolutely and unconditionally chargeable to nil rate, mostly in case of goods. ex

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – GST on Health care services – intra-state supply of Health care services attract NIL rate of central tax as per SL.No.74 of the Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) da

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Goods and Services Tax – Health care services – GST Provisions – Applicant providing the services of diagnosis, pre & post counseling! therapy and prevention of diseases by providing tests that are so

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST – Started By: – Yugank Goel – Dated:- 31-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 6-2-2019 – Whether reverse charge is applicable for advocate services rendered to SEZ Units?If yes, then what about the amount paid under reverse charge? Can we claim refund for the same?Please clarify… – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, There are two type of reverse charge scenarios provided in GST. First is with regards to nature of supply and/or nature of supplier. This scenario is covered by section 9 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017 (refer Notification No.13/2017-CT (Rates) dated 28.06.2017 as amended from time to time. Second scenario is covered by section 9 (4) of the CGST Act, 2017. However, all categories of registered persons are exempted from the provisions of reverse charge under 9(4) of CGST Act, 2017 / section 5(4) of IGST Act, 2017, till 31.06.2018 (Notification No. 10/2018-CT (Rates) dated 23.03.2018). Based on above, I am of the view that even SEZ unit is required to pay tax under RCM for the le

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ndia; (ii) the recipient of service is located in India; and (iii) the place of supply of service is in India; Further, inter-state supply in terms of Section 7 (5) of IGST Act, 2017 is as under:- 7. (5) Supply of goods or services or both,- (a) when the supplier is located in India and the place of supply is outside India; (b) to or by a Special Economic Zone developer or a Special Economic Zone unit; or (c) in the taxable territory, not being an intra-State supply and not covered elsewhere in this section, shall be treated to be a supply of goods or services or both in the course of inter-State trade or commerce . On going through above, I am still of the view that SEZ unit is liable to pay GST on reverse charge basis. Our experts may correct me if mistaken. With Regards – Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan – The Reply = Sir,Your points are correct as per the GST Law. However Government has issued a notification exempting IGST payable on services received by SEZ unit or developer for a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ions are mentioned below: Supply of goods or services under Bond or Letter of Undertaking without payment of integrated tax and claim refund of unutilised input tax credit of CGST, SGST / UTGST and IGST; or Supply of goods or services with payment of integrated tax and claim of GST refund on tax paid. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = GST not payable. Refund eligible. Rightly advised by both experts. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, On going through the views expressed by our experts in the instant case, it can be said that an Advocate is required to obtain registration and service rendered to SEZ considering as export of service either on payment of IGST or under LUT and then claim refund of IGST paid, if any. Sorry I defer. The export of service has been defined at Section 2(6) of IGST Act, 2017, which is as under:- (6) export of services means the supply of any service when,- (i) the supplier of service is located in India; (ii) the recipient of service is located outs

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

o avoid paying tax. if does not want to debate, then SEZ better pay tax and claim refund. – Reply By Lakshminarayanan TR – The Reply = By and Large, I echo the views of Alkesh Jani. SEZ is subject to 9(3), should discharge the tax and can go for refund of unutilised ITC on exports made with or without payment( both options available under refund scenarios). Notification no 18, applies only wrt to direct imports. Imports of services here only mean supplier located outside India so not applicable in case of an Advocate located in india. – Reply By LDRaj &CO – The Reply = Guess, we need to re-open this topic in light of recent amendment of SEZ rules 2006. As per SEZ act, procure from DTA is an import. Question is does SEZ overrule IGST for payment of RCM for advocate or GTA services? There were case laws I beleive in the past where SEZ over rules other acts like VAT – Reply By Shashank Tolwani – The Reply = Not applicable in light of clarification issued by the department via F No 334/335

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 09/2018 – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS GST BHAVAN, 41/A, SASSON ROAD, PUNE-411001 F. No. VIII/Cus/Tech/PN&SI/48-75/2016 Pune Dated: – 31.05.2018 PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 09/2018 Subject: reg. Attention of all Importers/ Exporters/ Customs Brokers and the Members of the Trade is drawn to Circular No. 12 / 2018 – Customs under F. No. 450/119/2017- Cus.IV dated 29.05.2018 issued by the Director (Customs): Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi. 2. In this context, it is bring to your notice that a number of representations have been received from the exporters / trade associations seeking resolution of problems which have hindered sanction of refund of IGST paid on exports. From time to time, Board has provided solutions to a number of issues because of which refunds were held up. However, there is still one major hindrance because of which GSTN could not transmit data to Customs EDI

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d and consequently IGST refunds could not be processed. The problem is compounded by the fact that the facility to adjust GSTR-3B in subsequent months is not available in all cases. 4. In view of the above following procedure is being prescribed to overcome the problem of refund blockage. This would be an interim solution subject to undertakings/submission of CA certificates by the exporters as given below and post refund audit scrutiny. The proposed procedure is as under: A. Cases where there is no short payment: (i) The Customs policy wing would prepare a list of exporters whose cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic outward supplies, for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is greater than or equal to the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-1 for the same period. Customs policy wing shall send this list to GSTN. (ii) GSTN shall send a confirmatory e-mail to these exporters regarding the transmission of records to Customs

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

xcess refunds to the exporters under this procedure, the details of such detections may be communicated to the concerned GST formations for appropriate action. 6. DG (GST) shall send the list of exporters to jurisdictional GST officers (both Centre / State) informing that these exporters have taken benefit of the procedure prescribed in this circular. The jurisdictional GST formations shall also verify the payment particulars at their end. 7. This Circular deals only with the cases where the records have not been transmitted by GSTN to Customs EDI system. Once the records are transmitted by GSTN to Customs System based upon the above mentioned procedure, the usual procedure adopted in case of sanction of IGST refunds would have to be followed. In cases where the errors like SB005, SB002, SB006 etc are encountered with the records so transmitted, the provisions of Circulars issued by Board earlier shall apply to them. 8. The above Public notice may be downloaded from the website www.pun

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – PUBLIC NOTICE No. 69/2018 – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS – IV EXPORTS ACC, SAHAR, ANDHERI (EAST), MUMBAI-400099. F.No.-S/3-Misc-254/2017-18 DBK(EDI)/ACC Date: 31.05.2018 PUBLIC NOTICE No. 69/2018 Sub: Sanction of pending IGST refund claims where the records have not been transmitted from the GSTN to DG Systems-reg. Attention of Exporters/ Customs Brokers and General Public is invited to the Board's Circular no. 12/2018 dated 29.05.2018 on the above subject. The same is reproduced for the knowledge and utility of all the stake holders concerned. 2. A number of representations have been received from the exporters / trade associations seeking resolution of problems which have hindered sanction of refund of IGST paid on exports. From time to time, Board has provided solutions to a number of issues because of which refunds were held up. However, there is still one major hindrance because of which GSTN could not transmit data to Customs EDI system

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

and consequently IGST refunds could not be processed. The problem is compounded by the fact that the facility to adjustGSTR-3B in subsequent months is not available in all cases. 4. In view of the above following procedure is being prescribed to overcome the problem of refund blockage. This would be an interim solution subject to undertakings/ submission of CA certificates by the exporters as given below and post refund audit scrutiny. The proposed procedure is as under: A. CASES WIIERIC TIIERF, IS NO SHORT PAYMENT: (i) The Customs policy wing would prepare a list of exporters whose cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic outward supplies, for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is greater than or equal to the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-I for the same period. Customs policy wing shall send this list to GSTN. (ii) GSTN shall send a confirmatory e-mail to these exporters regarding the transmission of records to Custo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the Board. B. CASES WHERE TIIERE IS SHORT PAYMENT: (i) In cases where there is a short payment of IGST i.e. cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic outward supplies together, for the period of July' 2017 to March' 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is less than the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-I for the same period, the Customs policy wing would send the list of such exporters to the GSTN and all the Chief Commissioner of Customs. (ii) e-mails shall be sent by GSTN to each exporter referred in para (i) above so as to inform the exporter that their records are held up due to short payment of IGST. The e-mail shall also advise the exporters to observe the procedure under this circular. (iii) The exporters would have to make the payment of IGST equal to the short payment in GSTR 3B of subsequent months so as to ensure that the total IGST refund being claimed in the Shipping Bill/GSTR-l (Table 6A) is paid. The proof Of payment shall be submitted to A

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rward to claim refund after making requisite payment of IGST towards short paid amountand complied with other prescribed requirements. (vii) The compiled list may be forwarded to Customs policy wing, DG (Audit) and DG (GST). Customs policy wing shall forward the said list of GSTINs to On receipt of the list of exporters from Customs policy wing, GSTN shall transmit the records of those exporters to Customs EDI system. (viii) The exporters whose refunds are processed/ sanctioned as above would be required to submit another certificate from Chartered Accountant before 31stOctober, 2018 to the same Customs office at the port of export to the effect that there is no discrepancy between the IGST amount refunded on exports and the actual IGST amount paid on exports of goods for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018. A copy of the certificate shall also be submitted to the jurisdictional GST office (Central/ State). The concerned Customs zone shall provide the list of GSTINs who have n

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 21/2018 – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CUSTOM HOUSE: PORT AREA: VISAKHAPATNAM – 530 035 F.No. P3/06/2017-Stats(AM) Date: 31.05.2018 PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 21/2018 Sub: Reg. ***** Attention of all Exporters, Custom Brokers and Members of trade is invited to Board s Circular No.12/2018-Customs dated 29.05.2018 regarding Sanction of pending IGST refund claims where the records have not been transmitted from the GSTN to DG systems enclo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – PUBLIC NOTICE No. 20/2018 – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS NEW CUSTOM HOUSE, KANDLA-370 210 Phone No. 02860-271468/469, FAX NO. 02836-271467 F. No. S/20-14/PN/AG/2018-19 Dated: 31/05/2018 PUBLIC NOTICE No. 20/2018 Subject: SPECIAL DRIVE FORTHNIGHT TO RECTIFY THE ERRORS RELATING TO IGST REFUNDS ON EXPORTS- REG. Attention of all Importers, Exporters, Customs Brokers, Members of the Trade and Industry and other stakeholders is invited towards Press Note dated 30.05.2018 released by the Chief Commissioner, Customs, Gujarat Zone with reference to Special Drive to rectify the Errors relating to IGST refunds on Exports during the fortnight 31.05.2018 to 14.06.2018. The CBIC and Custom Department had launched a spe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

T refunds stuck up on account of errors as follows: 1. Rectification of Error code SB005 -Invoice mismatch for the Shipping Bills. 2. EGM not filed or filed with errors at ICDs/Gateway ports. 3. Export made on payment of IGST but erroneously declared without payment of IGST/LUT. 4. Erroneously declared a different GSTIN in the Shipping Bill – SB003. In order to dispose-off the IGST refund, that has been stuck up due to above errors. the Custom House, Kandla will conduct a SPECIAL DRIVE FORTNIGHT from 31th May to 14th June, 2018 (Including Saturday & Sunday). All the Exporters/ Trade Associations are requested to take the advantage of SPECIAL DRIVE FORTNIGHT for rectification of errors through Officer Interface relating to IGST refund on

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – PUBLIC NOTICE No. 21/2018 – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW CUSTOM HOUSE, KANDLA – 370 210 F. No. S/20-14/PN/AG/2018-19 Dated: 31/05/2018 PUBLIC NOTICE No. 21/2018 Subject: – reg. Attention of all Importers, Exporters, Customs Brokers, Members of the Trade and Industry and other stakeholders is invited towards CBIC Circular No. 12/2018-customs dated 29.05.2018 issued through F. No. 450/119/2017/Cus-IV regarding Sanction of pending IGST refund claims where the records have not been transmitted from GSTN to DG Systems. 2. A number of representations were received from the exporters/ trade associations seeking resolution of problems which hindered sanction of refund of IGST paid on exports. From time to time, the Board has provided solutions to a number of issues because of which refunds were held up, However, there is still one major hindrance because of which GSTN could not transmit data to Customs EDI system and consequently refunds could not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

be processed. The problem is compounded by the fact that the facility to adjust GSTR-3B in subsequent months is not available in all cases. 4. In view of the above, following procedure is being prescribed to overcome the problem of refund blockage. This would be an interim solution subject to undertakings / submission of CA certificates by the exporters as given below and post refund audit scrutiny. The proposed procedure is as under: A. Cases where there is no short payment: (i) The Customs policy wing would prepare a list of exporters whose cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic outward supplies, for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is greater than or equal to the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-1 for the same period. Customs policy wing shall send this list to GSTN. (ii) GSTN shall send a confirmatory e-mail to these exporters regarding the transmission of records to Customs EDI system. (iii) The exporters whose

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n cases where there is a short payment of IGST i.e. cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic outward supplies together, for the period of July' 2017 to March' 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is less than the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-I for the same period, the Customs policy wing would send the list of such exporters to the GSTN and to the Chief Commissioner of Customs. (ii) E-mails shall be sent by GSTN to each exporter referred in para (i) above so as to inform the exporter that their records are held up due to short payment of IGST. The e-mail shall also advise the exporters to observe the procedure under this public notice. (iii) The exporters would have to make the payment of IGST equal to the short payment in GSTR-3B of subsequent months so as to ensure that the total IGST refund being claimed in the Shipping Bill/GSTR- 1 (Table 6A) is paid. The proof of payment shall be submitted to Assistant/ Deputy Commissioner of Customs in charge o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

payment of IGST towards short paid amount and complied with other prescribed requirements. (vii) The compiled list (at (vi) above) may be forwarded to Customs policy wing, DG (Audit) and DG (GST). Customs policy wing shall forward the said list of GSTINs to GSTN. On receipt of the list of exporters from Customs policy wing, GSTN shall transmit the records of those exporters to Customs EDI system. (viii) The exporters whose refunds are processed/ sanctioned as above would be required to submit another certificate from Chartered Accountant before 31st October, 2018 to the same Customs office at the port of export to the effect that there is no discrepancy between the IGST amount refunded on exports and the actual IGST amount paid on exports of goods for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018. A copy of the certificate shall also be submitted to the jurisdictional GST office (Central/State). The Customs zone shall provide the list of GSTINs, who have not submitted the CA certificate

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – PUBLIC NOTICE No. 80/2018 – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT) NEW CUSTOMS HOUSE, BALLARD ESTATE, MUMBAI – 400 001. Ph. 022-22757501, Fax. 022-22671113 e-mail: Drawback.nch@gov.in F. No. S/26-Misc-05/2018 IGST Date : 31.05.2018 PUBLIC NOTICE No. 80/2018 Subject: reg. It has been observed that a number of representations have been received from the exporters / trade associations seeking resolution of problems which have hindered sanction of refund of IGST paid on exports. From time to time, Board has provided solutions to a number of issues because of which refunds were held up. However, there is still one major hindrance because of which GSTN could not transmit data to Customs EDI system and consequently refunds could not be sanctioned. A validation has been introduced in the GSTN system to ensure that the IGST paid on the export goods in any particular month [3.1(b)] is not less than the refund claimed by the exporter [Table 6A]. However, dat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

oblem of refund blockage. This would be an interim solution subject to undertakings/ submission of CA certificates by the exporters as given below and post refund audit scrutiny. The proposed procedure is as under: A. Cases where there is no short payment: (i) The Customs policy wing would prepare a list of exporters whose cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic outward supplies, for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is greater than or equal to the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-1 for the same period. Customs policy wing shall send this list to GSTN. (ii) GSTN shall send a confirmatory e-mail to these exporters regarding the transmission of records to Customs FDI system. (iii) The exporters whose refunds are processed/ sanctioned would be required to submit a certificate from Chartered Accountant before 31st October, 2018 to the Customs office at the port of export to the effect that there is no discrepancy between t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed in GSTR-3B is less than the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-l for the same period, the Customs policy wing would send the list of such exporters to the GSTN and all the Chief Commissioner of Customs. (ii) c-mails shall be sent by GSTN to each exporter referred in Para (i) above so as to inform the exporter that their records are held up due to short payment of IGST. The e-mail shall also advise the exporters to observe the procedure under this circular. (iii) The exporters would have to make the payment of IGST equal to the short payment in GSTR 3B of subsequent months so as to ensure that the total IGST refund being claimed in the Shipping Bill/GSTR-1 (Table 6A) is paid. The proof of payment shall be submitted to Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Customs, IGST Refund Cell, 4th Floor, Annex. Building, New Custom House, Ballard Pier-40001, Ph. 022-22757535, email: Drawback.nch@gov.in. In case there are exports from multiple ports, the exporter is at liberty to choose any of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

oms policy wing, DG (Audit) and DG (GST). Customs policy wing shall forward the said list of GSTINs to GSTN. On receipt of the list of exporters from Customs policy wing, GS1'N shall transmit the records of those exporters to Customs EDI system. (viii) The exporters whose refunds are processed/ sanctioned as above would be required to submit another certificate from Chartered Accountant before 3lstOctober, 2018 to the same Customs office at the port of export to the effect that there is no discrepancy between the IGST amount refunded on exports and the actual IGST amount paid on exports of goods for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018. A copy of the certificate shall also be submitted to the jurisdictional GST office (Central/ State). The concerned Customs zone shall provide the list of GSTINs who have not submitted the CA certificate to the Board by the 15th, November 2018. (ix) Non submission of CA certificate shall affect the future IGST refunds of the exporter. Post re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 50/2018 – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (AIRPORT & ADMN) AIR CARGO COMPLEX,"NSCBI AIRPORT, KOLKATA: 700 052. F. NO. S41(Misc) – 64/2017CCX/Pt Date : 31.05.2018. PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 50/2018 Subject: reg. Attention of all the exporters, their authorized representatives and all export promotion is invited to CBEC Circular No.12/2018-Customs dated 29.05.2018 regarding alternative mechanism for the process of IGST refund. In view of the above, Air Cargo Complex, NSCBI Airport, Kolkata shall be conducting an IGST refund clearance fortnight from 31st May 2018 to 14th June, 2018. 2. Exporters whose cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

te shall also be submitted to the jurisdictional GST office (Central/ State). Non submission of CA certificate shall affect the future IGST refunds of the exporter. 3. In cases where there is a short payment of IGST i.e. cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic outward supplies together, for the period of July 2017 to March 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is less than the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-1 for the same period, the exporters would have to make the payment of IGST equal to the short payment in GSTR 3B of subsequent months so as to ensure that the total IGST refund being claimed in the Shipping Bill/GSTR-1 (Table 6A) is paid. The proof of payment shall be submitted to Assistant Commissioner of Cust

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n liquidated. The exporter would give an undertaking that they would return the refund amount in case it is found to be not due to them at a later date. 5. The exporters whose refunds are processed/ sanctioned as above would be required to submit another certificate from Chartered Accountant before 31.10.2018 to the same Customs office at the port of export to the effect that there is no discrepancy between the IGST amount refunded on exports and the actual IGST amount paid on exports of goods for the period July 2017 to March 2018. A copy of the certificate shall also be submitted to the jurisdictional GST office (Central/State). Non-submission of CA certificate shall affect the future IGST refunds of the exporter. 6. CBEC Circular No.12/2

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs – 39/2018 – Dated:- 31-5-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI-IV CUSTOM HOUSE, 60, RAJAJI SALAI, CHENNAI-600 001. Dated : 31.05.2018 F. No. S.Misc.07/2018-Refunds-(Ch. IV) PUBLIC NOTICE No.39/2018 Subject: Sanction of pending IGST refund claims where the records have not been transmitted from the GSTN to DG Systems reg. A number of representations have been received from the exporters/trade associations seeking resolution of problems which have hindered sanction of refund of IGST paid on exports. From time to time, Board has provided solutions to a number of issues because of which refunds were held up. However, there is still one major hindrance because of which GSTN could not transmit data to Customs EDI system and consequently, refunds could not be sanctioned. A validation has been introduced in the GSTN system to ensure that the IGST paid on the export goods in any particular month [3.1(b)I is

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of the above following procedure is being prescribed to overcome the problem of refund blockage. This would be an interim solution subject to undertakings/ submission of CA certificates by the exporters as given below and post-refund audit scrutiny. The proposed procedure is as under: A. Cases where there is no short payment: (i) The Customs policy wing would prepare a list of exporters whose cumulative IGST amount paid against exports and interstate domestic outward supplies, for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is greater than or equal to the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-1 for the same period. Customs policy wing shall send this list to GSTN. (ii) GSTN shall send a confirmatory e-mail to these exporters regarding the transmission of, records to Customs EDI system. (iii) The exporters whose refunds are processed/ sanctioned would be required to submit a:, certificate from Chartered Accountant before 31st October, 2018 to the Customs office

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

pplies together, for the period of July' 2017 to March' 2018 mentioned in GSTR-3B is less than the cumulative IGST amount indicated in GSTR-i for the same period, the Customs policy wing would send the list of such exporters to the GSTN and all the Chief Commissioner of Customs. (ii) e-mails shall be sent by GSTN to each exporter referred in para (i) above so as to inform the exporter that their records are held up due to the short payment of IGST. The email shall also advise the exporters to observe the procedure under this circular. (iii) The exporters would have to make the payment of IGST equal to the short payment in GSTR 3B of subsequent months so as to ensure that the total IGST refund being claimed in the Shipping Bill/GSTR 1 (Table 6A) is paid. The proof of payment shall be submitted to Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Customs in charge of port from where the exports were made. In case there are exports from multiple ports, the exporter is at liberty to choose any of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Customs policy wing, DG (Audit) and DG (GST). Customs policy wing shall forward the said list of GSTINs to GSTN. On receipt of the list of exporters from Customs policy wing, GSTN shall transmit the records of those exporters to Customs EDI system. (viii) The exporters whose refunds are processed/ sanctioned as above would be required to submit another certificate from Chartered Accountant before 31st October, 2018 to the same Customs office at the port of export to the effect that there is no discrepancy between the IGST amount refunded on exports and the actual IGST amount paid on exports of goods for the period July' 2017 to March' 2018. A copy of the certificate shall also be submitted to the jurisdictional GST office (Central/ State). The concerned Customs zone shall provide the list of GSTINs who have not submitted the CA certificate to the Board by the 15th November 2018. (ix) Non-submission of CA certificate shall affect the future IGST refunds of the exporter. Post ref

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2018 (10) TMI 307 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING – UTTAR PRADESH – 2018 (17) G. S. T. L. 52 (A. A. R. – GST) – Development Authorities – exempt entity or not – Taxability of supply of goods and services – Whether the Development Authorities formed and constituted under “Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973” are to be treated as “Exempt entity or not” under new GST Law?
–
Held that:- It is undisputed fact that the Development Authority has been constituted under Uttar Prade

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =