Goods and Services Tax – Levy of GST – providing the service of teaching to the students of Class Xlth and Xllth science – providing the coaching for entrance examination – The education service provi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Levy of GST – reinstatement charges paid to Municipal Authorities – to carry out the excavation of roads for laying, repair and maintenance of electric supply lines – the acti
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Classification of Caesarstone – an article made from artificial stone – same would not be covered by the Chapter 25 and the Heading 2506 – Caesarstone imported by the applican
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (5) TMI 1805 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI – Refund of duty paid – export of goods – rejection of refund on the ground of time limitation – Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – Held that:- The First Appellate Authority should be give an opportunity to reconsider the issue afresh. Accordingly, impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority to reconsider the issue afresh after following the principles of natural justice – appeal allowed by way of remand. – Appeal No. E/31214/2017 – A/30583/2018 – Dated:- 9-5-2018 – Mr. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri N Ram Reddy, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri P. S. Reddy, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent. ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran Th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
them on the ground that initially they had debited the amount from CENVAT account. Both the lower authorities have rejected the refund claim only on the ground that it is hit by limitation as per the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 4. Learned Counsel brings to my notice in an identical issue, the First Appellate Authority by Order-in-Appeal dated 28.03.2018 had taken a diagonally opposite view and allowed the refund claim filed by the appellant. On perusal of the impugned order in appeal (dated 25.09.2017) and the order produced by the Learned Counsel dated 28.03.2018 I do find it so. 5. In my view, the First Appellate Authority should be give an opportunity to reconsider the issue afresh. Accordingly, impugned o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (12) TMI 727 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI – CENVAT Credit – credit to be availed after payment of amount under Rule 4(7) – extended period of limitation – absence of allegation of suppression of facts – Held that:- Rule 4(7) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, states that “the Cenvat Credit in respect of input service shall be allowed, on or after the day that which payment is made of the value of input service and the service tax paid or payable as is indicated in invoice, bill or, as the case may be, challan referred to in Rule 9.”
–
Rule 6(2A) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 specifies that the date of payment in case of service tax shall be the date of presentation of cheque subject to realization of cheque – it is also found from the records that none of the cheque issued by the appellant were dishonored.
–
Appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – S.T. Appeal No.75423/18 – FO/76543/2018 – Dated:- 9-5-2018 – SHRI P. K. CHOUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Sushil Kr. Goyal,
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
mits that the appellant has maintained proper records in respect of all the receipts and consumption of input services under Rule 9 (6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as amended. It is his submission that the complete facts and figures were duly disclosed in the ST-3 Returns and proper records as required were being maintained by the appellant and therefore, there cannot be any allegation of suppression against the appellant and the extended period of limitation of five years is not invokable. The ld.C.A.for the appellant also submits that the demand is barred by limitation. 4. The ld.A.R. for the Revenue, reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. 5. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 6. On perusal of records, I find that Rule 4 (7) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, states that the Cenvat Credit in respect of input service shall be allowed, on or after the day that which payment is made of the value of input service and the service tax paid or payable as is indi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
that the issue is covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of India Cement Limited Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Hyderabad : 2002 (150) ELT 1344. In this regard, the relevant Para is reproduced below: 8. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. In the instant case, the penalties have been imposed on the appellants on the ground that there is a gap of few days between the date of presentation of cheque to their banker and the date of actual realisation of the amount by the Revenue. As can be seen that there is no dispute that the cheques presented by the appellants were subsequently encashed by the Revenue and no cheque was dishonoured and accordingly the date of presentation of the cheque has to be taken as the relevant date for the purpose of taking credit. Precisely this was the view taken by the Tribunal in the cases referred to above. Further more, the Commissioner himself has given a categorical finding that there was no
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (12) TMI 714 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI – CENVAT Credit – contravention to the provisions of Rule 3 (5A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 – it was alleged that assesses have not paid Central Excise duty on the clearance of used and rejected machinery/machinery spare/equipment – Held that:- Rule 3(5A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, prescribes that “if the capital goods are cleared as waste and scrap, the manufacturer shall pay an amount equal to the duty leviable on the transaction value” – the appellant all along stated that waste and scrap generated from the capital goods were brought into the factory much before 01.04.1994, when where was no provisions for availing credit on the capital goods.
–
It is the case of the appellant that s
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
l classifiable under Chapters 72 and 73, among others, of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Show-cause notice dated 07.05.2014 was issued for the period 2009-2010 alleging that the assesses have not paid Central Excise duty on the clearance of used and rejected machinery/machinery spare/equipment in contravention to the provisions of Rule 3 (5A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of ₹ 2,31,875/- along with interest and imposed equal amount of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On appeal, the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Hence, the present appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 4.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (7) TMI 1493 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING – MAHARASHTRA – 2018 (15) G. S. T. L. 423 (A. A. R. – GST) – Classification of goods – rate of GST – MIDEL eN 1204 – MIDEL eN 1275 – What is the correct Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) code and the applicable GST rate for our products MIDEL eN 1204 (rapeseed oil based dielectric transformer fluid) and MIDEL eN 1275 (soya oil based dielectric transformer fluid) in terms of Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June 2017?
–
Held that:- The products are not vegetable fats and vegetable oils per se – The products do not remain mere vegetable fat or mere vegetable oil. The impugned products are a distinct product which is known in the market as a dielectric transformer fluid – The products also contain additives, the information about which has also not been shared with this Authority. But the manufacturing process of these ingredients and the addition of additives leads to a distinct product being formed.
–
Th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
tion 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as "the CGST Act and MGST Act"] by M&I MATERIALS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the applicability of GST on: What is the correct Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) code and the applicable GST rate for our products MIDEL eN 1204 (rapeseed oil based dielectric transformer fluid) and MIDEL eN 1275 (soya oil based dielectric transformer fluid) in terms of Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June 2017? At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provision under the MGST Act. Further to the earlier, henceforth for the purposes of th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
usiness in India 2.4 Provide local first line support for any technical queries. 3. The details of the products for which the Advance Ruling is being sought is as follows: 3.1 MIDEL eN 1204 3.1.1 It is a vegetable oil based dielectric transformer fluid It is a chemically modified rapeseed oil based natural ester 3.1.2 It is used as electric insulator in transformers Its function is to provide electrical insulation, suppress corona and arcing, and to serve as a coolant. 3.1.3 We have classified MIDEL eN 1204 as per the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) code under the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as "the Customs Tariff') under the entry 15180039 The relevant extract of the entry is reproduced hereunder for ease of reference: "1518.00 animal or vegetable fats and oils and their fractions , boiled, oxidised, dehydrated, sulphurised, blown, polymerised by heat in vacuum or in inert gas or otherwise chemically modified, excluding
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
y of various goods is notified vide Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June 2017, as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as "the Notification"). 4.1 Under the Notification, the HSN code 1518 appears under "Schedule I – 2.5%" as well as "Schedule 2 – 6%". The relevant extract is reproduced hereunder for ease of reference: 4.2 S. No. Chapter / Heading / Sub-heading / Tariff item Description of goods Schedule I – 2.5% 90. 1518 Vegetable fats and oils and their fractions, boiled, oxidised, dehydrated, sulphurised, blown, polymerised by heat in vacuum or in inert gas or otherwise chemically modified, excluding those of heading 1516 [emphasis supplied] Schedule II – 6% 27. 1518 Animal fats and animal oils and their fractions, boded, oxidised, dehydrated, sulphurised, blown, polymerised by heal in vacuum or in inert gas or otherwise chemically modified, excluding those of heading 1516; inedible mixtures or preparations of animal or
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
o. 90 of Schedule – 1 [applicable rate of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) – 2,5%]. To support our view, we would like to put forth our contentions, without prejudice to each other, as follows: 1. Specific entry should prevail over general entry 1.1 Chemically modified vegetable oils are more specifically covered under Entry at S No 90 of Schedule – I of the Notification. Hence, both our products viz, MIDEL eN 1204 and MIDEL eN 1215 should be classified under the said entry. 1.2 Further, explanations (iii) and (iv) to Notification No 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June 2017, as amended from time to time, state as under "iii "Tariff item ", "sub-heading" "heading " and "Chapter'' shall mean respectively a tariff item, sub-heading, heading and chapter as specified in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975). iv. The rules for the interpretation of the first Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
emphasis supplied) 1.4 The entry at S. No 27 of Schedule II – 6% is a general entry mainly referring to animal fats and oils while vegetable fats and oils are mentioned only cursorily. Further, it should be noted under the said entry only those vegetable fats or oils can be covered which are not specified elsewhere. 1.5 It is a well established principle of taxation jurisprudence for resolving classification disputes that a specific entry shall prevail over a general entry. In this regard, we would like to bring to your attention the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Western India Plywoods Ltd. versus Collector of Customs, Cochin [2005 (188) E.L.T 365 (S.C.)] (attached as Annexure I), wherein the question pertained to classification of "motor vibrator with actuator" under the Customs Tariff. In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, " … it is well settled that the application of the residuary tariff entry must always be mad
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
to both our products 2. Intention of the legislature 2 .1 It is pertinent to note that whereas under the Customs law, animal or vegetable fats and oils are part of the same entry i.e. 1518.00 (supra), under the GST regime a conscious decision has been made by the GST Council to split the said entry between vegetable fats and oils and animal fats and oil by including vegetable fats and oil under Schedule I of the Notification which provides for lower GST rate of 2.5%. 2.2 The Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Dattatraya Govind Mahajan versus State of Maharashtra [1977 AIR 915] (attached as Annexure 3) has held that, "…. ultimately it is the intention of the legislature which is paramount and mere use of a label cannot control or deflect such intention. It must be remembered that the legislature has different ways of expressing itself and in the last analysis the words used by the legislature alone are the true repository of the intent of the legisla
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
for ease of reference: S. No. Chapter / Heading / Subheading / Tariff item Description of goods Schedule I – 2.5% 88. 1516 Vegetable fats and oils and their fractions, partly or wholly hydrogenated, inter-esterified, re-esterified or elaidnised, whether or not refined, but not further prepared. " 3.3 Both our products being vegetable oil based esterified transformer fluids, we submit that they should fall within the ambit of the said entry and classified accordingly. 4. Beneficial rate under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax (MVAT) Act, 2002 4.1 Most of the customers of the Company to whom these products are supplied include government and non-government entities operating in the essential sector of electricity generation, transmission and distribution. 4.2 Under the erstwhile MVAT regime, Sec 8 (5) of the MVAT Act empowered the State Government for partial or full exemption from Value Added Tax (VAT) on sales made by a registered dealer, inter cilia, to entities involved in generat
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
on is taken in this matter and also crave leave to produce documents / records / case law at the hearing granted to us." Additional submission dt.16.03.2018 We, M/s. SKP Business Consulting LLP, in our capacity as authorised representatives of M/s. M&I Materials India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the Company" or "us" or "we") refer to the preliminary hearing held for admission / rejection of our advance ruling application on 7 March 2018 We thank you for admitting our application and granting us another opportunity to present our case During the course of the hearing, we were requested to submit certain additional information and documents in connection with our advance ruling application. Accordingly, without prejudice to the contentions raised by us in our previous submissions we would like to submit as under: 1. Principle of equivalence under GST 1.1 Under the erstwhile excise law, the tariff rate of excise duty applicable to it
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
eration, transmission and distribution of electrical energy. 1.4 Given the above, it is evident that our products being supplied to an essential sector, the incidence of tax was kept at a minimum i.e. 5%, to avoid any undue tax burden on the ultimate customers of essential sector of electricity. 1.5 At this juncture we would like to reproduce the relevant extract from the minutes of the 3rd and the 4th GST Council meetings held on 18-19 October 2016 and 3-4 November 2016 respectively, wherein the principles for fixation of GST rates were debated upon: – 3rd GST Council meeting "37. The principles on the basis of which the proposed GST rate structure was worked out was elucidated and these included: (i) proposed rate slabs should be closest to the present combined tax incidence of 'Excise and VAT (including cascading): (ii) protecting existing revenues of Centre and States: (iii) impact on inflation i.e.. on items in the Consumer price Index (CPI) basket is minimal, (iv) propos
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d the proposal to have a four rate GST structure and the rates could be 6%, 12%, 18% and 26%. He explained that a slab of 6% was needed for such goods where VA T was being charged at 5% and Central Excise duty on the same goods was Nil. He stated that if such goods put in the 12% rate band, it would adversely affect the poorer sections of the society." [emphasis supplied] 1.6 Applying the principles emanating from the discussions and observations made by the GST Council it is incontrovertible that our products should be classified under the GST rate bracket which is closest to the combined rate of tax applicable under Central Excise and VAT – i.e. 5% 1.7 Therefore, we submit that the intention of the GST Council provides a compelling view that our products should be classifiable under Entry at S No. 90 of Schedule – I – 2.5% of the Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June 2017, as amended from time to time. 1.8 Further, the Hon'ble Finance Minister Arun Jaitley
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ed under Entry at S. No. 90 of Schedule -I of the Notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June 2017, as amended from time to time, i.e chargeable to GST at the rate of 5%. 2. Non-classification as 'mixtures' 2.1 The quantity of additives in our products viz. MIDEL eN 1204 and MIDEL eN 1215 is minimal i.e. 0.3% of the total weight of the product. Therefore, the said products cannot be considered as 'mixtures' covered under Entry at S. No. 27 of Schedule II – 6%. 2.2 In order to corroborate our explanation, a copy of test report by 'Electrical Research and Development Association' of our product MIDEL eN 1215 is attached herewith as "Annexure 6". 3. Further, as required, a flow chart exhibiting the transaction flow of the products has been attached herewith as "Annexure 7" We request your good self to take the above on record and oblige." 03. CONTENTION – AS PER THE CONCERNED OFFICER The submissions, as reproduced verbatim, cou
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
be used as only dielectric fluid. The dealer is in his application admit that use of the product is transformer fluid, which means it is inedible and hence covered by Schedule II. Chapter heading 1518 and rate of tax applicable is 6%. 2) The above submission is made in the light of Notification No. 1/2017-State Tax(Rate) No. MGST-1017/C.R. 104/Taxation 1 dated 29/06/2017. Hon. Forum is humbly requested to admit the application for Advance Ruling and decide the issue as per above mentioned notification. " 04. HEARING The case was taken up for hearing on dt.07.03.2018 when Sh. Jigar Doshi, Sh. Shivendra Dwivedi, Sh. Harshal Fifadra, Sh. Prathamesh Shende along with Sh. Nitin Satija, Director and Country head attended and made oral submissions for admission of their application as per submission made in the Advance Ruling application. They were requested to provide copies of Bill of Entries of import of their products for last one year and it was also requested to provide exact cont
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the cost of repetition, let us have a look at the information about the products as provided by the applicant- MIDL eN1204 It is a vegetable oil based dielectric transformer fluid. it is chemically modified rapeseed oil based natural ester. It is used as electric insulator in transformers. Its function is to provide electrical insulation, suppress corona and arcing, and to serve as a coolant. The applicable Indian Standards (IS) of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 is IS 16659:2017. MIDEL eN 1215 It is a vegetable oil based dielectric transformer fluid. It is a chemically modified soya based natural ester. It is used as electric insulator in transformers. Its function is to provide electrical insulation, suppress corona and arcing, and to serve as a coolant. The applicable Indian Standards (IS) of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 is IS 16659:2017. The above information does not throw a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
tified uses of the substance or mixture and uses advised against Product Use: Dielectric fluid Uses advised against: None. 1.3 Details of the supplier of the substance or mixture Company: M&I Materials Ltd. Hibernia Way, Trafford Park, Manchester, M32 0ZD, UK. 1.1 Product Identifier Material Name: MIDEL eN 1215. 1.2 Relevant identified uses of the substance or mixture and uses advised against Product Use: Dielectric fluid Uses advised against: None 1.3 Details of the supplier of the substance or mixture Company: M&I Materials Ltd., Hibernia Way, Trafford Park, Manchester. M32 0ZD, UK 2. Hazards Identification This product is not classified as hazardous and this document has been compiled for information purposes, in accordance regulation 1907/EC/2006, Annex II, as amended by Regulation (EU) No. 453/2010 and OSHA hazard communication guidelines. 2.1 Classification of the substance or mixture Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) Not classified. 2.2 Label elements Regulation (EC) No
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
68-3 Description: Blend of natural triglyceride esters (vegetable oil) Composition: Constituent CAS Number Contents Blend of natural triglyceride esters 68956-68-3 >98.5% Performance enhancing additives Proprietary<1.5% All constituents are listed on the TSCA inventory. Additives used in this product are a trade secret, but do not lead to classification of the substance as hazardous. 4. First Aid Measures 4,1 Description of first aid measures Inhalation: None envisaged due to the low vapour pressure of the substance Skin: Wash with soap and water. Obtain medical attention if irritation develops. Eyes: Irrigate with copious amounts of water. Obtain medical attention if irritation develops. Ingestion: Do not induce vomiting, obtain medical attention. 4 2 Most important symptoms and effects, both acute and delayed No adverse effects expected 4.3 Indication of any immediate medical attention and special treatment needed No special treatment required. 4.1 Description of first aid meas
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nd use(s) Exposure to air should be minimised. Opened containers should be properly resealed 8. Exposure Controls/ Personal Protection 8 1 Control parameters No relevant control parameters. 8 2 Exposure controls Eye washes should be available for emergency use Respiratory protection: None required. Skin protection: Wear coveralls Hand protection: Wash hands after use. For prolonged or repeated skin contact gloves are recommended Eye protection If splashes are likely to occur wear safety glasses. 8.1 Control parameters No relevant control parameters. 8 2 Exposure controls Eye washes should be available for emergency use. Respiratory protection: None required. Skin protection: Wear coveralls. Hand protection: Wash hands after use. For prolonged or repeated skin contact gloves are recommended. Eye protection: If splashes are likely to occur wear safety glasses. 11. Toxicological Information 11.1 Information on toxicological effects Likely routes of exposure: Skin and eyes are the most lik
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
oil based and as such non-toxic. Acute oral toxicity: Considered to be low toxicity, vegetable oil. Acute dermal toxicity: Considered to be low toxicity. Acute inhalation toxicity: Low volatility makes inhalation unlikely Skin corrosion/irritation: Considered to be not irritating Eye corrosion/irritation Considered to be not irritating. Respiratory or skin sensitisation: Considered to be not sensitising Aspiration hazard: Not considered an aspiration hazard Carcinogenicity/mutagenicity: Not considered a mutagenic hazard or carcinogen. This product is not considered to be a carcinogen by IARC, ACGIH, NTP or OSHA. What we can gather from the above is thus : Composition/lnformation on Ingredients Constituent CAS Number Contents MIDEL eN 1204 (rapeseed oil based dielectric transformer fluid) Blend of natural triglyceride esters 68956-68-3 >98.5% Performance enhancing additives Proprietary <15% MIDEL eN 1204 (soya based dielectric transformer fluid) Blend of natural triglyceride ester
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
weight of the product. Therefore, the said products cannot be considered as 'mixtures'. Having seen thus, we look at the contention with regard to the applicability of the schedule entries thus – If it is assumed that either or our products cannot be classified under entry at S. No. 90 of Schedule I – 2.5%, we would like to submit that, entry at S. No. 88 of Schedule I – 2.5% also provides an appropriate description of our products, and that in no case the said products can be classified under the general entry at S. No. 27 of Schedule II – 6%. We shall look at each of the above entries as found in the Notification No. 1/2017-Central / State Tax (Rate) [as amended from time to time] thus – S. No. Chapter / Heading/ Subheading / Tariff item Description of Goods Rate [CGST + MGST] 88 1516 Vegetable fats and oils and their fractions, partly or wholly hydrogenated, inter-esterified, re-esterified or elaidinised, whether or not refined, but not further prepared. 5% [2.5 +2.5] 90 151
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
uid. 3. The applicant has argued that the products cannot be considered as 'mixtures'. However, we find a reference to the products being a 'substance' or 'mixture' in the Safety Data Sheet of these products as can be seen thus – 1.3 Details of the supplier of the substance or mixture 4. No information about the manufacturing process has been given. Neither any information has been shared as to the ingredients contained in the products. The products also contain additives, the information about which has also not been shared with this Authority. But we see that the manufacturing process of these ingredients and the addition of additives leads to a distinct product being formed. The ingredients or additives are added so as to formulate a certain product which could be used as a transformer fluid. So the processes are intended to manufacture a new commodity in which rapeseed oil or soya would be the prime ingredient. Owing to this, the products are described as &q
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
parations of animal or vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of different fats or oils of this Chapter, not elsewhere specified or included : Lin seed oil: 1518 00 11 Edible grade 151800 19 Other Castor oil, dehydrated: 1518 0021 Edible grade 1518 00 29 Other Other Vegetable oil and its fats: 1518 00 31 Edible grade 1518 00 39 Other 151800 40 Other From the Tariff Heading 1518 as reproduced above, we see that – a. There are 2 parts to Tariff Heading 1518 thus – • Part 1 – Animal or vegetable fats and oils and their fractions, boiled, oxidized, dehydrated, sulphurised, blown, polymerized by heat in vacuum or in inert gas or otherwise chemically modified, excluding those of heading 1516; • Part 2 – Inedible mixtures or preparations of animal or vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of different fats or oils of this Chapter, not elsewhere specified or included: B. Of the Tariff Heading 1518, schedule entry 90 covers portion relating to vegetable fats and oils and the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s and their fractions should retain their original fundamental structure. e. The part 1 (as reproduced above) of Heading 1518 speaks of certain processes which have been subjected to vegetable and animal oils. But the HSN Notes say that despite undergoing these processes, the vegetable or animal oils should retain their original fundamental structure. In the present case, we have a final product which is a transformer fluid. Though the Test Report shows the percentage of the natural triglyceride esters to be at 98.5%, it would not mean that a new commodity has not been produced. There are data and international standards galore for mineral oils, there are as yet no IEC standards addressing the composition or testing of the natural ester oils with their different chemical composition. Each manufacturer has his own set of ingredients to obtain a transformer fluid. That is precisely the reason that the applicant has not preferred to divulge the details. Thus, by addition of the needful ad
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
to part 2 (as reproduced above) of Heading 1518. This part covers inedible mixtures or preparations of animal or vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of different fats or oils of the Chapter 15. The present products, as discussed above, are a preparation from natural triglyceride esters. They are based or derived from "rapeseed oil based" or "soya based". In addition, the products are inedible. And even though the applicant disputes about the products being a 'mixture', there being a combination of ingredients and additives, the impugned products could be classified as an 'inedible preparation'. Therefore, they could very well be covered by the description "inedible preparations of vegetable oils'. Now the aspect which remains to be seen is "not elsewhere specified or included". We have not found any specific description which covers a "dielectric transformer fluid". To that extent, it is prima facie felt that the descr
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
hapter 15 of the Customs Tariff Heading/GST Tariff. 6. We are not in doubts that entry 88 and 90 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017-Central / State Tax (Rate) would not cover the impugned products. We are also convinced that the impugned products are not covered by any entry of the Schedule in the Notification No. 2/2017- Central / State Tax (Rate) for goods exempted from GST. It is only the question of entry 90 or any other entry of the Notification No. 1/2017- Central / State Tax (Rate) which would cover the impugned products. 7. We have gone through the case laws and arguments relied upon by the applicant. However, we find that they do not apply to the facts that we are faced with. Since we have formed an opinion on the facts at hand, we would not enter into any discussing or differentiating the case laws. 06. In view of the deliberations as held hereinabove, we pass an order as follows: ORDER (under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Mahara
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (7) TMI 161 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI – CENVAT credit – inputs – cement, angles, TMT bars, etc – Held that:- The impugned order has relied upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. [2010 (4) TMI 133 – CESTAT, NEW DELHI (LB)] in holding that the definition of ‘inputs’ does not include cement, angles, TMT bars, etc. However, this judgment of the Tribunal has been disapproved by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Surya Alloy Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [2014 (9) TMI 406 – CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] – credit cannot be denied.
–
Further, the Chartered Engineer’s certificate reflects that the impugned goods were actually used during the manufacture of the final products – the usage of various iron and steel items is to be analysed in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [2010 (7) TMI 12 – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA].
–
Shortage of finished goods detected during the stock verific
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
l reason for shortage and deposited the entire amount of duty of ₹ 82,906/-. The adjudicating authority confirmed demand of duty of ₹ 82,906/- alongwith interest and also imposed penalty of equal amount of duty. It has also disallowed Cenvat Credit of ₹ 3,89,093/- along with interest and imposed penalty of equal amount of Cenvat Credit on capital goods. The officers also found that the appellant had taken credit on MS Angle, joist, channel, beam, TMT bars, etc. considering them as capital goods. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice dated 18.06.2007 was issued proposing demand of Central Excise Duty of ₹ 81,280/- along with interest and irregular availment of Cenvat Credit of ₹ 3,81,479/- with interest and to impose penalty. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. Hence, the present appeal before the Tribunal. 2. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 3. The ld. Advocate for the appellant submitted that there was an extra
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
STR 726 (Guj.). 4. The ld. AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. 5. I find that the impugned order has relied upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. reported as 2010 (253) ELT 0440 Tri.-LB in holding that the definition of inputs does not include cement, angles, TMT bars, etc. However, this judgment of the Tribunal has been disapproved by the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Surya Alloy Industries Ltd. v. Union of India reported as 2014 (305) ELT 47 (Cal.). Therefore, credit on the impugned goods cannot be denied to the appellant. 6. Further, the Chartered Engineer s certificate reflects that the impugned goods were actually used during the manufacture of the final products. I find that the usage of various iron and steel items is to be analysed in light of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. reported as 2010 (255) ELT 481 (SC). In this judgment, the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
GST – States – F.IV/Misc/HR/GST/27/2015-16/Part file/5239 -5245 – Dated:- 9-5-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITALTERRITORY OF DELHI DEPARTMENT OF TRADEAND TAXES (HUMAN RESOURCE BRANCH) VYAPAR BHAWAN, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002. ORDER F.NO. F.IV/Misc/HR/GST/27/2015-16/Part file/5239 -5245 Dated: 09.05.2018 Specification of Proper Officer under various provisions of DGST Act, 2017. In exercise of the power conferred upon me by sub-section (1) of section 5 read with clause (91) of section 2 o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (5) TMI 1030 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (14) G. S. T. L. 184 (All.) – Seizure of goods with vehicle – goods dispatched without E-way bill – petitioner has furnished the E-way bill before the respondent no.3 prior to the seizure proceedings and seizure order – Section 129(3) of the UPGST Act – Held that: – Once the E-way bill is produced and other documents clearly indicates that the goods are belongs to the registered dealer and the IGST has been charged there remains no justification in detaining and seizing the goods and asking the penalty – the seizure order dated 5.5.2018 as well as the consequential penalty order dated 5.5.2018 quashed – goods with vehicle to be released immediately – petition allowed – decided in favor of petitioner. – Writ Tax No. 763 of 2018 Dated:- 9-5-2018 – Hon'ble Krishna Murari And Hon'ble Ashok Kumar, JJ. For the Petitioner : Nishant Mishra For the Respondent : C.S.C. ORDER Heard Sri Nishant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
No. UP 13 AT 1153 on 4.5.2018. It is an admitted case of the petitioner that though the E-way bill post 1.4.2018 was not clear and the notification issued under CGST/UPGST Act were silent with regard to requirement of E-way bill for inter-state transactions, the petitioner dispatched the goods without generating the E-way bill. While movement of the vehicle and when the vehicle crossed Yamuna Express Way it was intercepted by the respondent no.3 Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Mobile Squad, Unit-II, Noida at 1.30 a.m. on 5.5.2018 solely on the ground that the goods were not accompanied with E-way bill. The respondent no.3 has proceeded for inspection/physical verification of the goods and for the same he has issued verification report in part-A and part-B on 5.5.2018 itself wherein no time has been mentioned. When the proprietor of the petitioner's firm has received the information about interception of the vehicle, he has immediately generated E-way bill on 5.5.2018 at 11.55 a.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
29(3) are completely without jurisdiction, arbitrary as such are nothing but clearly a misuse of power by the respondent no.3. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a recent decision of this Court in the case of Axpress Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and 3 others reported in 2018 NTN (Vol.66) 245. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the goods were intercepted at 1.30 a.m. on 5.5.2018 whereas the E-way bill was generated on the same day at 11.55 a.m. which was furnished before the respondent no.3 but reasons best known to the respondent no.3, a seizure order and consequential penalty order has been passed. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that once E-way bill was generated after interception of the goods, but before seizure order is passed, then the goods cannot be seized as is held by this Court in the case of Axpress Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the circular dated 13.4.2018 issued by the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
under Section 129(3). Both the aforesaid orders are passed on 5.5.2018 i.e. before the date which has been indicated in the interception memo being 6.5.2018. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the petitioner has placed the E-way bill on 5.5.2018 itself the respondent no.3 has illegally proceeded to pass the impugned orders before any physical verification done. We find substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Once the E-way bill is produced and other documents clearly indicates that the goods are belongs to the registered dealer and the IGST has been charged there remains no justification in detaining and seizing the goods and asking the penalty. In view of the aforesaid facts, we quash the seizure order dated 5.5.2018 as well as the consequential penalty order dated 5.5.2018. We direct the respondent no.3 to immediately release the goods and vehicle in favour of the petitioner. The writ petition is allowed. – Case laws – Decisi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (5) TMI 887 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Nature of activity – deemed sale or service? – Supply of Tangible Goods – appellants are engaged in supply, installation and operation of digital camera equipment having Qube digital technology to various theatre owners on ‘right to use’ basis through an agreement entered with the parties – Department was of the view that the supply of digital camera equipment on higher basis to theatre owners would fall within the definition of service as under Section 65 B (44) of the Act, and the nature of the said service as defined under Section 66 E (f) of the Finance Act, 1994 is liable to levy of service tax.
–
Held that: – The sub-clause (f) of Section 66 E (declared services) refers to transfer of goods by way of hiring, leasing, licensing or in any such manner without transfer of right to use such goods – in the present case the supply of goods involves transfer of right of possession and effective control on such goods and therefore would fall
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
basis through an agreement entered with the parties. In terms of the said agreement/LOU, the theatre owners pay a non-refundable deposit and also pay per show fee and in addition to this the appellant will have exclusive right of 20 mts. advertising time for every show. Further, the appellant has to install, commission and maintain all the appliances at their cost and these shall always remain the property of the appellants. The department was of the view that the supply of digital camera equipment on higher basis to theatre owners would fall within the definition of service as under Section 65 B (44) of the Act, and the nature of the said service as defined under Section 66 E (f) of the Finance Act, 1994 is liable to levy of service tax. Three separate SCNs were issued for various periods from July 2012 to March, 2015 and after due process of law, the original authority vide separate Order-in-Original confirmed the demands, interests and imposed penalties. In appeal, the Commissioner
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ion 66 E – declared services. He pointed out that Section 65 B (44) sub-clause (ii) specifically excludes activity which involves transfer, delivery or supply of goods, which is deemed to be a sale within the meaning of clause 29 A of article 366 of the Constitution. That the activity rendered by the appellants was analysed by the Tribunal in the above stated Final Order wherein the Tribunal held that the activity is a deemed sale and does not fall under the category of Supply of Tangible Goods service. That, therefore the issue stands covered by the appellant s own case for the period after July, 2012 also. He prayed that the demand may be set aside. 4. The Ld. AR, Shri B. Balamurugan, AC, reiterated the findings in the impugned orders. 5. Heard both sides. 6.1 Undoubtedly, the activity on which the demand of service tax has been made in these appeals are analogous/identical to the activity which has been under scrutiny in the final order stated supra. The Tribunal after appreciating
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the category of supply of tangible goods service. The department contends that the theatre owners do not have any right of possession of the equipment and that the appellants have not transferred the right of possession. That since the appellant has retained certain rights and also put down conditions that the theatre owners shall ensure that the appliances connected to the VSAT remains switched on all times that is 24 hours a day in order to enable the appellant to have access to the QCP would amount to retaining the effective control over the equipment. In the decision of G.S. Lamba & Sons Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (supra), the Hon‟ble High Court has summarized the meaning and transfer of possession as well as retaining effective control over machinery. The relevant portion of the decision is as under:- 30. From the judicial decisions, the settled essential requirement of a transaction for transfer of the right to use goods are : (i) it is not the transfer of the property
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
r of goods, even if such licences or permits are in the name of owner (transferor) of the goods, and (vi) during the period of contract exclusive right to use goods along with permits, licences etc., vests in the lessee..‟ 8.3 Following the said decision, we are of the view that the activity carried out by the appellant, involving supply of tangible goods for use, since such supply also involves transfer of right of possession and effective control of such goods, the said activity would not fall under supply of tangible goods service. Moreover, the appellant has furnished documents which show that the said user fee collected is assessed under the VAT Act. The levy of VAT and service tax being mutually exclusive, the demand is not sustainable on this ground also. The demand raised and related penalties will therefore require to be set aside which we hereby do. 6.2. The appellant has been discharging VAT on the said activity holding that the transfer of right to use the equipment b
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
on; or (22) declared service means any activity carried out by a person for another person for consideration and declared as such under section 66E; 65 B (51) taxable service means any service on which service tax is leviable under section 66B; 66 E Declared Services – The following shall constitute declared services, namely:- (f) transfer of goods by way of hiring, leasing, licensing or in any such manner without transfer of right to use such goods; The Tribunal having already analysed the nature of the activities in the appellant s own case for a previous period, we are of the considered opinion that the activity does not fall within the definition of service under the Finance Act, 1994 as amended in 2012. 8. In the result, impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential reliefs, if any. ( Operative part of the Order pronounced in the open Court ) – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement –
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Kishore Padav – Dated:- 8-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 9-5-2018 – Our Company had sold an equipment to a customer (A) in May 2017 @ ₹ 20 lakhs (incl. CST). The customer (A) has paid us only ₹ 7 lakhs till date.He has expressed his inability to pay the balance ₹ 13 Lakhs and has asked the company to take back his machine or help him sell his machine. Now we have found a customer (B) who has agreed to purchase the machine @Rs.13 Lakhs from hi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – JAY SHAH – Dated:- 8-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 9-5-2018 – HelloWe have a partnership firm and registered as composition dealer under GST regime. now i want to convert the same to proprietorship by retiring one partner and other one continue in same business under same banner. is there any tax liability arise on closing stock? in proprietorship also i want to continue under composition dealer. – Reply By kollengode venkitaraman – The Reply = WHEN THE BUSINESS OF THE PARTNERSHIP IS TAKEN OVER BY ONE PATNER AS A PROPRIETORSHIP, IT WILL BE EXEMPT TAKING OVER A BUSINESS AS A WHOLE IS EXEMPTED UNDER GST – Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN – The Reply = In my view you cannot continue under erstwhile compos
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
t we are composition dealer. If we pay GST on closing stock in partnership firm for transfer of stock to proprietorship then we are going to pay two time GST. One at the time of transfer to proprietorship and again we have to pay gst in proprietorship on final sale. – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Dear Querist, There is no doubt that afresh registration is required as rightly advised by Dr.Govindarajan, Sir.. When you apply for a new registration, you are to decide whether to opt for composition dealer or not. New registration, afresh option is required. It is natural that a composition dealer cannot avail ITC Actually, no-provision of ITC as composition dealer is a hurdle for you. Otherwise there would have been no problem as rightl
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – GST – By: – Mr. M. GOVINDARAJAN – Dated:- 8-5-2018 – Implementation of e-way bill The implementation of e-way bill has caused more delay because of the improvements to be done in the portal system. The Central Government has announced that the e-way bill system would be applicable for the inter-State transactions with effect from 01.02.2018 and the States would implement the e-way bill system for intra-State transactions by 1st June, 2018. Because of the glitches in the system, the Central Government postponed the implementation date and finally it has been implemented with effect from 01.04.2018. The States are advised to implement the same before 1st June, 2018. E-way bill operations are now available for the following States- E-way bill operations are compulsory for intra-state movement of goods for Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Kerala, Telangana and Uttar Pradesh from 15th April 2018; E-way bill operationsare compulsory for intra-state movement of goods for Bih
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
there was some problem in downloading the E-way Bill. The High Court directed to release the vehicles and goods subject to deposit of bank guarantee, equal to the value of the tax on goods. In Abicor and Binzel Technoweld Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Union of India and Another – 2018 (2) TMI 766 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT, the petitioner says that the Electronic Way Bills Rules have yet to come into force. Therefore, without access to the online profile, the petitioner cannot generate E-way bills. Without such E-way bills, the petitioner will not be allowed to move the goods anywhere and that will paralyze its business. Lack of access would mean that the petitioner is unable to file return or pay tax or undertake any other compliance required by the statute. The High Court held that the special sessions of Parliament or special or extraordinary meetings of Council would mean nothing to the assessees unless they obtain easy access to the website and portals. The regime is not tax friendly. The High C
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
dication provided for under section 129 after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, within a week from the date of receipt of the order. Seizure before effective date In Modern Traders V. State of UP – 2018 (4) TMI 1076 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (decided on 03.04.2018) the goods were transported from Bhulandshahr to Delhi. There was no e-way bill during the movement of goods, while the vehicle was crossing Ghaziabad. The vehicle was intercepted and detained at Ghaziabad by the Assistant Commissioner, Mobile Squad on 24.03.2018. The vehicle was seized on the ground that there was no e-way bill. A show cause notice dated 28.03.2018 was issued under section 129(3) of the Act, The petitioner was directed to appear on 04.04.2018 and explain as to why the tax @ 18% and equivalent amount of penalty may not be imposed. The petitioner, therefore, approached the High Court invoking writ jurisdiction. The petitioner, in this writ petition contended that- There is no requirement to carr
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s in the present case the transaction is much before the aforesaid date. The High Court directed respondent No. 3 to release the goods and vehicle. In M/s Bhumika Enterprises V. State of U.P. And 3 Others – 2018 (4) TMI 530 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, from perusal of the record the High Court have noticed that the vehicle has been detained and the goods/vehicle was seized by the respondent no.4 on 27.3.2018 whereas the time has been granted for submission of reply and appearance of the person concerned before the respondent no.4 on the later date. There is no dispute with regard to quality and quantity of the goods and further that the invoice issued clearly indicates of charge of C.G.S.T. and S.G.S.T by the petitioner. The High Court further noticed that there is no dispute with regard to registration of the seller (the petitioner) and the purchaser as also that the goods were being transported from Varanasi to Fatehpur which are detained in between the aforesaid two places. The High Cour
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d seizure order nor the details of the mobile number holder. Since the tax invoice indicating the tax charged and the same admittedly found during the course of inspection/detention and E-way bill-02 has been downloaded much before the seizure order, the High Court saw no justification in the impugned seizure order and therefore, the High Court have no option but to allow the present writ petition and to set aside the seizure order dated 27.3.2018 as well as the show cause notice issued under Section 129(3) of the Act for imposition of penalty. Justification for seizure In Surendra Steel Supply Company Versus State of U.P. And Another – 2018 (5) TMI 526 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, (decided on 11.04.2018) the vehicle carrying the goods was intercepted at Kanpur on 01.04.2018 at about 9-30 a.m. by respondent no. 2 and interception/detention memo was issued on the ground that since the E-Way Bill No.01 is not available as such the physical verification of the goods loaded is to be made and fi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e as the Central Government has suspended the requirement of E-Way Bill No.01 on 01.02.2018. The Revenue has not been able to justify the impugned order in the facts and circumstances of the case. The High Court required respondent no.2-Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Mobile Squad-XI, Kanpur, U.P. to appear before the Court day after tomorrow (13.04.2018) to explain as to under which authority of law he intercepted the vehicle and passed the seizure order despite E-Way Bill No.01 was generated and produced. Non mentioning of vehicle number In VSL Alloys (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of U.P. And Another – 2018 (5) TMI 455 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, (decided on 13.04.2018) the detention was made on the ground that Part-B of e-way bill was incomplete. The contention of the petitioner before the authority below was that there was no intention on the part of the petitioner to evade payment of tax during the course of intra-state sale of the goods. The High Court Held that no ill inten
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – Kusalava InternationalLimited – Dated:- 8-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 22-6-2018 – we are mfg co and provide transportation facility to employee from home to factory and factory to home for that we have purchased bus and given to one person(Unregistered Person) to run bus.For that we are paying every month bill to him.(including Diesel,Driver Salaries and his commission)1.What is the rate of GST to be charged on Bill if he is registered?Please refer SAC Code.2.Can we claim ITC on that bill? – Reply By Praveen Nair – The Reply = SAC – 9964 @18%. As per section 17(5) of the CGST Act input tax credit shall not be available in respect of motor vehicles and other conveyances except when they are used for making the following taxable supplies; Further supply of such vehicles or conveyances. Transportation of passengers. Imparting training on driving, flying, navigating such vehicles or conveyances. For transportation of goods. Transportation of passenger
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
same fixed point. This service cannot be classified in the nature of personal consumption either as the activity is related to business only. Further this transportation service cannot be classified under rent-a-cab service. As such, I feel, GST input tax credit is available in this case. would invite experts counter opinion on this. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, For ready reference please allow me to reproduce relevant portion of Section 17(5) of CGST, Act, 2017. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 16 and sub-section (1) of section 18, input tax credit shall not be available in respect of the following, namely:- (a) motor vehicles and other conveyances except when they are used- (I)for making the following taxable supplies, namely:- (A) further supply of such vehicles or conveyances ; or (B) transportation of passengers; or….. For better understanding meaning of cab is important and meaning was assigned in the erstwhile Finance Act (
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
1988, are covered under Rent-a-cab service. Based on above, I am of the view that ITC is not available in the instant case. Our experts may correct me if mistaken. Thanks – Reply By KASTURI SETHI – The Reply = Sh.Alkesh Jani Ji, Top most reply. Crystal clear interpretation. – Reply By JSW CEMENTLIMITED – The Reply = Sh Alkesh Janiji, appreciate your analysis. But, still I am of the same view that credit of service provided by using the company's bus is available to a manufacturer on the following ground. In the absence of definition of cab in GST Act, you have to refer the definition given other existing law in force viz; motor vehicle Act only and not repealed law (i.e.section 65(20) of Finance Act which was in in force till 30.06.2012). During Service tax regime, credit on transportation of employees were not available and department has issued a no. of SCNs but in GST transportation of employee would be covered under input tax credit eligibility norm for the reason that bus is
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
in which the driver sits . Now rent-a-cab means renting of the space which controls the motor vehicle. The bus falls as motor vehicle having capacity of carrying more than 12 passengers and falls with the ambit of Rent-a-cab service. Repeating that an employee cannot be termed as passenger . If I accept your contention that bus is not a cab then too it is covered under Section 17(5)(a)(i)(B) of CGST Act, 2017, ITC with regards to motor vehicle except for transportation of passenger, is not available. Let me thank Sh. Kasturiji,Sir for expressing their views. Our experts may correct me if mistaken. Thanks – Reply By JSW CEMENTLIMITED – The Reply = Sir,Here the queriest is not asking for eligibility of ITC on Bus, but his query is with regard to services availed for transportation of employees. ITC on buses purchased for the purpose of transportation is not available but services provided by using the buses for transportation of employees are available. The meaning provided in Cambridge
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ility extended to the employee by the employer, this service is not obligatory for an employer to provide to its employee under any law for the time being in force. However, as there are various decision in the erstwhile law allowing the Credit as input service but that depends upon the facts and circumstances of the case. Further, it is onus on the assessee to prove the nexus.Request for comments.Thanks – Reply By JSW CEMENTLIMITED – The Reply = SirPresently, most of the companies are located in remote areas away from the city, and almost all the companies are providing pick and drop facilities to its staff and sub-staffs for the reason that they reach office and plant in time so that production is not hampered. This facility may be seen as a facility given to employee for the benefit of business only. Unless there is business requirement companies will not extend this facilities. Let's talk about a BPO where can facilities are given to its employees due to time constraint, is it
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
g. However, there is a slim chance on the ground of challenging the definition of 'passenger' in this context. – Reply By JSW CEMENTLIMITED – The Reply = Kasturi sirI respect your interpretation and experience also. Still I am not convinced as to why we are comparing employees with passenger, employer employee relationship and all. The service is not falling under rent a cab service where eligibility is restricted except it is performed under as an obligation under some law, it can not be said to be a welfare facility, it is used for furtherance of business, it helps people to reach workplace in time attend to their duty timely,. Directly or indirectly it has a bearing on the manufacturing business, still all the experts are negative towards eligibility. – Reply By Alkesh Jani – The Reply = Sir, I agree that by way of discussion we may reach to some good conclusion. My participation here is to meet the new horizon. Now coming to the point, the facility extended to employee is d
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
The grounds of notice, orders and appeal and person representing the case is important and than too the decisions may not be expected or favorable. The case law, as on now, have not attained its finality, I may agree with the contention in future. Please offer your comments and correct me if mistaken. Thanks, – Reply By Anubhav Bansal – The Reply = Deal All,I went through entire discussion in this thread which mainly is on eligibility of ITC in this case of services.Now, I seek experts opinion on what will be the GST treatment of this service in hands of the Company when they are giving this service to employees i.e. will it be consider as supply in terms of the provision of CGST act and will company have to discharge GST liability in case:-1. When the company is recovering partial amount towards this service cost from the employees.2. When the company is giving this service free of cost.This question is in light to the AAR, Kerala ruling in case of M/S Caltech Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Mala
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
usal: ACTIVITIES TO BE TREATED AS SUPPLY EVEN IF MADE WITHOUT CONSIDERATION 1. Permanent transfer or disposal of business assets where input tax credit has been availed on such assets. 2. Supply of goods or services or both between related persons or between distinct persons as specified in section 25, when made in the course or furtherance of business: Provided that gifts not exceeding fifty thousand rupees in value in a financial year by an employer to an employee shall not be treated as supply of goods or services or both. Further, as per the explanation to section 15, for the purposes of CGST Act:- (a) persons shall be deemed to be related persons if – (i) ………..; (ii) ……..; (iii) such persons are employer and employee; Conjoint reading of this 2 provisions of the act make this service as taxable even when an employer is giving it for free of cost. Please let me know your thoughts on the matter and how do you take it? Regards, Anubhav Bansal – Reply By JSW CEMENTLIMITED –
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ng a gift. Another issue is the taxation of perquisites. It is pertinent to point out here that the services by an employee to the employer in the course of or in relation to his employment is outside the scope of GST (neither supply of goods or supply of services). It follows therefrom that supply by the employer to the employee in terms of contractual agreement entered into between the employer and the employee, will not be subjected to GST. Further, the input tax credit (ITC) scheme under GST does not allow ITC of membership of a club, health and fitness centre [section 17 (5) (b) (ii)]. It follows, therefore, that if such services are provided free of charge to all the employees by the employer then the same will not be subjected to GST, provided appropriate GST was paid when procured by the employer. The same would hold true for free housing to the employees, when the same is provided in terms of the contract between the employer and employee and is part and parcel of the cost-to-
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
mehow save the commission cost being paid by the manufacturing company to the person. – Reply By HIREGANGE& ASSOCIATES – The Reply = My views are as below: a): 17 (5) (a) not applicable as it blocks credit on supply of motor vehicles when supplied as such but not on the services provided by using such motor vehicle. Accordingly, no need of considering definition of passenger/employee etc. b) Restriction in 17 (5) (iii) is on the rent a cab not renting of motor vehicle. Erstwhile Cenvat Credit Rules excluded from the definition of input services services provided by way of renting of a motor vehicle . If the intention of law makers under GST was to disallow credit on buses, they could have used similar language. (i.e. motor vehicle instead of rent a cab) c) Cab is defined separately from Motor Vehicle under Motor Vehicle Act which includes vehicle having passenger capacity upto 12 passengers. Thus it is one of the type of motor vehicle but it cannot be said that all cab includes all nat
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
allowed as gradually credits would become more seamless in future. – Reply By YAGAY and SUN – The Reply = Get it clarified from the Law Makers as there are certain words on which no definition is provided in the GST Law. – Reply By Anubhav Bansal – The Reply = Dear Venkat Ramanji,Thanks for sharing the extract of those advertisement. After reading it, I am of the opinion that your conclusion basically is relied upon following extracts of the advertisment it follows therefrom that supply by the employer to the employee in terms of contractual agreement entered into between the employer and the employee, will not be subjected to GST. If this be the case then even the partial recovery form the employee can be said to be a contractual agreement between employer and employee. Then why should this partial recovery from the employees is liable for GST in hands of employer? Reference to the ruling of AAR Kerala bench.Regards,Anubhav Bansal – Reply By JAIPRAKASH RUIA – The Reply = Very happy t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ansportation of goods; Based on above, it is clear that law has very specifically conveyed that ITC is available ONLY for taxable supply i.e. (i) further supply of such vehicles, (ii) for transportation of passengers or goods and (iii) imparting training. In my point of view drop and pick up of employee does not fall within this namely services. Moreover, supplies to employer to employee has specifically mentioned in Section and schedules, wherever, benefit is to be granted. So only those supplies including gifts, where specifically mentioned is available to employer. So, I am of the view that ITC is not available. Thanks – Reply By Anil Sood – The Reply = Friends let us have a look at the Apportionment & blocked credit:- 17. (1) Where the goods or services or both are used by the registered person partly for the purpose of any business and partly for other purposes, the amount of credit shall be restricted to so much of the input tax as is attributable to the purposes of his busin
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
i) rent-a-cab, life insurance and health insurance except where- (A) the Government notifies the services which are obligatory for an employer to provide to its employees under any law for the time being in force; or (B) such inward supply of goods or services or both of a particular category is used by a registered person for making an outward taxable supply of the same category of goods or services or both or as part of a taxable composite or mixed supply; and (ii) travel benefits extended to employees on vacation such as leave or home travel concession; Now, if we look at the definition, the credit of motor vehicle is inadmissible except in the case of buses owned by the Employer because the buses are not engaged for providing services of transportation of passengers. However, if the Employer hires buses from outside and makes payment to the owner of the buses towards transportation of employees, the Input tax credit, in my view is admissible because without transportation of employ
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Supply of newspaper on board the trains – The supply of newspaper is separately invoiced and hence it shall be at Nil” GST under S. No. 120 of Notification No. 2/2017 – AAR – TMI Updates – Highlights
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Rate of GST – supply of food on board the trains – it is not possible to classify the whole contract as supply of services – The supply of goods i.e. food, bottled water etc.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Classification – TROPHY – even though the word TROPHY is specifically mentioned under 83062920, all trophies made of any material cannot be classified under this HSN and are t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Before AAR, the following question was raised: I would like to know if there is a combination of different materials and about 75% (value terms) is getting used of any one Raw
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Started By: – nandankumar roy – Dated:- 8-5-2018 Last Replied Date:- 8-5-2018 – DEAR SIR,SUPPLIER OR CREDITORS ISSUED CREDIT NOTE AGAINST RATE DIFFERENCE THAT IS SHOWING IN GSTR2 CAN WE WE TAKE THIS AMOUNT IN OUR GSTR1 BY TREAT AS DEBIT NOTE OR WHETHER CREDITORS REFLECTED ITC AMOUNT ONLY TO BE REVERSE IN 3B RETURN TILL HAVE TO WAIT SUBMISSION OF GSTR2 IN FUTURE.WITH REGARDS,N K ROY – Reply By Praveen Nair – The Reply = Dear Mr. Roy GSTR1 returns are to be filed against
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Goods and Services Tax – Classification of books – Work Books or Exercise Book – Sulekh Sarita – presence of printed text does not affect their classification under heading 48.20 as exercise books – F
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (8) TMI 1075 – CESTAT AHMEDABAD – TMI – By-product, Baggase – explanation I to Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 – N/N. 6/2015-CE(NT) dt. 1.3.2015 – case of Revenue is that bagasse being not an excisable goods and cleared from the factory, against consideration, therefore, would come within the scope of Rule 6 of the CCR, 2004 – Held that:- There is no hesitation to hold that even after amendment to Rule 6 of CCR, 2004, ‘bagasse’ which emerges as a waste/by-product, accordingly, falls outside the scope of the Rule, 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal No: E/10352/2018-SM – A/11452/2018 – Dated:- 8-5-2018 – Dr. D. M. Misra, Member (Judicial) For Appellant (s): Shri Rohit Lalwani, Advocate For Respondent (s): Shri L. Patra, AR ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both sides. 2. This is an appeal filed against the order-in-appeal No. VAD-EXCUS-002-APP-346-2017-18 dtd. 25.08.2017 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), GST & Central Excise-Vapi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
riod after 01.03.2015, considering the amendment to Rule 6 of CCR, 2004. He submits that in view of Explanation-I to Rule 6 (1) of CCR, 2004, the department has alleged that Bagasse being an excisable goods, covered under the scope of the amendment, and accordingly, Bagasse cleared during the period from 01.03.2015 to 30.09.2015, attracts 6% of the value of the said bagasse. It is his contention that even though after amendment to said Rule 6 of CCR, 2004, the process of manufacture remains the same and it emerges as a waste/by-product, only and inevitable during the course of manufacture of Sugar and Molasses. He submits that the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Union of India vs. M/s DSCL Sugar Ltd – 2015-TIOL-240-SC-CX is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. 4. Ld. AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 5. I find that the department has dropped the demand on the by-product Bagasse for the period p
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the by-product bagasse. Clause (d) and (h) of the said Rule reads as follows:- (d) "exempted goods" means excisable goods which are exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, and includes goods which are chargeable to "Nil" rate of duty; (h) "final products" means excisable goods manufactured or produced from input, or using input service; 6. The amended definition of excisable goods and manufacture , have been considered by the Hon ble Supreme Court in DSCL Sugar Ltd s case (supra). Their Lordships observed as follows:- 10. In the present case it could not be pointed out as to whether any process in respect of Bagasse has been specified either in the Section or in the Chapter notice. In the absence thereof this deeming provision cannot be attracted. Otherwise, it is not in dispute that Bagasse is only an agricultural waste and residue, which itself is not the result of any process. Therefore, it cannot be treated as falling within the d
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (7) TMI 76 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, GUJARAT – 2018 (14) G. S. T. L. 483 (A. A. R. – GST), [2018] 2 GSTL (AAR) 84 (AAR) – Levy of GST on supply made to related party without consideration – Tripartite Agreement – scope of supply – By virtue of tripartite agreement between NDDB, State Government & Unions, whether the arrangement between NDDB and Unions would be considered as supply between ‘related persons’ in accordance with Schedule 1 of the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017? – developing dairying in the respective states – state governments have entrusted NDDB to run the management, appoint key managerial persons and provide end to end services which ultimately would help the Unions in developing. – Held that:- Section 7 of CGST Act defines ‘supply’. Some of the scope of supply, as per Section 7c of the Act, are the activities specified in Schedule I, made or agreed to be made without a consideration. One of the activities to be treated as a supply even if made withou
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
upport to the applicant. In such a situation, there is no kind of relationship between NDDB and the Unions. Hence situation specified at sl no. 5 of Section 15(5) of CGST Act is not found in existence in the transaction between NDDB and WAMUL and NDDB & JMU and accordingly such transactions are not to be considered as related party transactions in GST.
–
Whether the applicant would be required to determine value of activities undertaken by them in accordance with Section 15(5) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 28 of the CGST Rules, 2017? – Held that:- Since the answer to the first part of the points raised by the applicant is negative no need to examine the next point of them.
–
Ruling:- The transactions undertaken by NDDB and Unions in accordance with the agreements made by NDDB with State Government of Assam and Jharkhand are not to be considered as supply between ‘related persons’ in accordance with Schedule I of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 read with Section 15 of
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
specifically authorized NDDB to undertake any activity entrusted by the central government or any state government where the government requires assistance of NDDB s expertise in the dairy development sector; that as per Section 16(5) of the NDDB Act, the applicant can participate, with the prior approval of the central government, in any organization, financially, managerially, or in any other manner. 1.2 The applicant stated that the state government of Jharkhand & Assam have sought assistance of the applicant to support Jharkhand State Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Limited (JMU) and West Assam Milk Producers Co-operative Union Limited (WAMUL); that arrangement has been entered into by the said state governments and applicant with an objective of reviving the JMU & WAMUL (hereinafter jointly referred to as Unions ) and developing dairying in the respective states; that the state governments have entrusted NDDB to run the management, appoint key managerial persons and
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
kind or otherwise. It is also submitted that the applicant has not issued any invoices to state governments or Unions. 1.5 The applicant further submitted that during the earlier regime of service tax, the services so provided by them were not subject to service tax in absence of any kind of consideration; that the situation would remain the same irrespective of the fact that the parties to the contract are related persons; that in GST regime, the transaction between related person would be valued at open market value irrespective of the fact that there is no consideration and price is the sole consideration for supply. 1.6 It is further submitted that according to Section 7 of CGST Act read with Schedule I, the supply of goods or services between related persons, even without consideration, in the course of furtherance of business would be contemplated as supply of goods or service; that in order to be supply, it is essential to understand whether NDDB and Unions would be considered a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ubmitted that Unions are beneficiaries of the agreement as the agreements are entered into for their growth; that as per the agreement dated 26.9.2013 the scope of WAMUL is limited to provide support to NDDB in managing and running the operations of WAMUL. 1.9 The applicant then on the aspect of who can be considered as service recipient in any transaction referred the decisions of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Paul Merchants Limited Vs. Commissioner of C.Excise, Chandigarh (2013 (29) STR 257 (Tr-Del.) and GAP International Sourcing (India) Pvt.Limited Vs. Commissioner of S.Tax , Delhi (2015(37) STR. 757 (tri-Del.). 1.10 It is also submitted by the applicant that the relationship between parties is identified from the perspective of who is service recipient; that it is logical and legal that the relationship can never be established between the service provider and the beneficiaries. The applicant then submitted that, in absence of any kind of relationship between NDDB and Unions in th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
earning any kind of benefit which means that there are no extra commercial benefit to be earned by the applicant. In view of above, the applicant submitted that nil or zero charges are sole consideration for supply and therefore, the same needs not require revaluation to open market value. 1.12 The applicant further stated that the agreements has originated due to signing of a contract between NDDB and the state governments and the applicant is in a position to control Unions only because of agreements due to which the relationship is formed and in such a situation the agreement because of which the relationship establishes cannot be considered a related party transaction requiring open market valuation; that the relationship is not established between them as a reason of acquiring any stake by either of them or any beneficial interest. 1.13 The applicant further stated that it is logically inappropriate that when the applicant does not charge anything and the arrangement is undertaken
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ion and the corrigendum to earlier application for advance ruling and made at the time of personal hearing. We have also gone through the comments offered by the department vide FNo. IV/16-29/GST/AAR-NDDB/T/17 dated 18.01.2018. 3. Firstly, we would like to see the provisions for the Schedule I of the CGST Act, 2017. Schedule- 1 deals with the activities to be treated as supply even if made without consideration. Section 7 of CGST Act defines supply . Some of the scope of supply, as per Section 7© of the Act, are the activities specified in Schedule I, made or agreed to be made without a consideration. One of the activities to be treated as a supply even if made without consideration, as per clause 2 of Schedule I, is the supply of goods or services or both between related persons or between distinct persons as specified in section 25, when made in the course or furtherance of business. 4. Provisions of Section 15 of CGST Act, 2017 provides for valuation of taxable supply of goods
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
led by a third person; 7. together they directly or indirectly control a third person; or 8. They are members of the same family. 5 In the present case, pursuant to the agreements made by the applicant with the state government of Jharkhand and Assam, the applicant provides services to Unions. It is also seen that the actual services are received by the concerned State Governments and the Unions are simply beneficiaries of the services performed by the applicant. Thus, there is no question of exercise of control by the applicant over the Unions. Unions are in fact provide support to the applicant to fulfill the purposes as per the agreements made with the state governments and the applicant and in return they receive the benefits of it. 6 By the agreement dated 26th September, 2013, between the State of Assam and NDDB, made with a view to revive WAMUL, a decision is found to have been taken to hand over the management of WAMUL to NDDB under some terms and conditions specified therein.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ernment of Jharkhand . 8 It would be evident from above that the Unions are only beneficiaries of agreement entered into by the state governments with the applicant. The Unions are required only to provide adequate support to the applicant. In such a situation, we do not find any kind of relationship between NDDB and the Unions. Hence situation specified at sl no. 5 of Section 15(5) of CGST Act is not found in existence in the transaction between NDDB and WAMUL and NDDB & JMU and accordingly such transactions are not to be considered as related party transactions in GST. 9. Since the answer to the first part of the points raised by the applicant is negative no need to examine the next point of them. 10. Considering above, we rule as under:- RULING (i) The transactions undertaken by NDDB and Unions in accordance with the agreements made by NDDB with State Government of Assam and Jharkhand are not to be considered as supply between related persons in accordance with Schedule I of Cen
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
2018 (6) TMI 466 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, ANDHRA PRADESH – 2018 (13) G. S. T. L. 474 (A. A. R. – GST) – Classification of Supply – supply of solar power generating system – Turnkey EPC Contract – split contract for supply of goods and supply of services – Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Central Tax (Rate) both dated 28 June 2017 and Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 29 June 2017?
–
Turnkey EPC Contract – Other EPC Contract – supply of solar power plant under ‘Turnkey EPC Contract’ – Held that:- The scope of work in respect of “Turn key EPC Contract” and “Other EPC Contract” includes civil works, procurement of goods and erection and commissioning. Accordingly, “Turnkey EPC Contracts” and “Other EPC Contracts” are not getting covered under supply of ‘solar power generating system’ under Entry 234 of Schedule I of the N/N. 1/2017-
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
tral tax (Rate), dated 28th June, 2017. And the supply of service attracts at the rate specified thereon in Notification No. 11/2017 -Central tax (Rate).
–
Supply Contract – the assembly, erection, and ‘commissioning of the solar power plant is undertaken by a third party contractor – Held that:- In this scenario, the goods are supplied by one contractor, and the services were supplied by the other contractor. Therefore the rate of tax applicable for supply of goods as long as it satisfies the condition of being “ device and parts” of the solar power generating system attracts 5% rate of tax as per Entry 234 of Schedule I of Notification No 1/2017 -Central tax (Rate), dated 28th June, 2017.
–
Balance of Plant Supply Contract – supply of ‘solar power generating system – What would be nature of supply i.e. composite supply or mixed supply? – Held that:- The nature of transaction falls under composite transaction as both the goods and services are naturally bundled. Even though th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
under Section 31 (4) of the CGST Act/SGST Act read with Section 12(2) thereof? – Held that:- Yes, the time of supply of power plant shall be determined under Section 31 (4) of the CGST Act/SGST Act read with Section 12(2) thereof. – Ruling No. AAR/AP/3O(GST)/2018 In Application No. AAR/05(GST)/2018 Dated:- 8-5-2018 – MR. J. V. M. SARMA, JOINT COMMISSIONER (STATE TAXES), AUTHORITY ADVANCE RULING, ANDHRA PRADESH AND MR AMARESH KUMAR, JOINT COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL TAXES), AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ANDHRA PRADESH For The Present Applicant : Applicant himself attended RULING Mr. Dinesh Kumar Agrawal, R/o #501, ACME Regency, 5m floor, SV Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra (hereinafter also referred as an applicant), is an unregistered taxpayer, is engaged in erection and supply of solar power generating system by making an agreement with his customers, has filed an application on 09,h February 2018. Vide acknowledgement number VPG736416, for seeking advance ruling for the tax ra
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ns by this authority. 1. The Issues raised by the applicant is as follows., Issue No. 1 Whether supply of solar power plant under Turnkey EPC Contract is supply of solar power generating system under Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Central Tax (Rate) both dated 28 June 2017 and Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017-State Tax (Rate) dated 29 June 2017? Issue No. 2 Whether supply of solar power plant under Other EPC Contract is supply of solar power generating system under Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Central Tax (Rate) both dated 28 June 2017 and Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- State Tax (Rate) dated 29 June 2017? Issue No.3 Whether supply of solar power plant under Supply Contract is supply of solar power generating system under Entry 234 o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
solar power generating system under Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Central Tax (Rate) both dated 28 June 2017 and Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- State Tax (Rate) dated 29 June 2017? Issue No.6 If the Clarification to Issue No. 5 is negative, what would be nature of supply i.e. composite supply or mixed supply? Issue No.7 Whether contract for assembly, erection, and commissioning of the plant undertaken by the Applicant under a separate contract would be a service contract liable to be taxed under Service heading 9954? Issue No.8 Whether the time of supply of power plant shall be determined under Section 31 (4) of the CGST Act/SGST Act read with Section 12(2) thereof? The Issues raised by the applicant is fit to pronounce advance ruling as they falls ambit of the Section 97(2) (a), (b) and (c), they are as given under (a) Classification of any goods or servic
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
t and supply of all equipment/components for the power plant (iii) Assembly, erection, and commissioning (iv) Operations and Maintenance of the plant between 2 to 15 years In Other EPC Contract, the Applicant is required undertake all activities of turnkey projects except civil work. The scope of work typically involves: (i) Designing, procurement and supply of all equipment/components for the || power plant (ii) Assembly, erection, and commissioning In Supply Contract, the Applicant is required to supply the power plant on complete knocked down condition in piecemeal at project site. Customer engages a third party contractor or the Applicant for assembly, erection, and commissioning of the plant under a separate contract. In Balance of Plant Supply Contract, the Applicant is required to supply goods and services stated above, except solar panels. Solar panels procured by the customer are made available by the customer to the Applicant for assembly and erection. Statement of facts as s
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
mp; Commissioning B. Equipment and components are delivered at project site and stored at the risk of the Applicant C. Ownership is transferred on successful commissioning of the plant D. Payment is as per milestone or monthly depending on the % of goods delivered at site E. Full payment is released on successful commissioning of the plant with stipulated power generation. F. Cost: a. In the case of Ground Base Solar Project: 20% Civil & Erection & 80% Supply. Roof Top Base Solar Project: 10% Civil & Erection & 90% Supply. For Issue number 2, the statement of facts are as follows… The scope of supply includes: a. Detailed designing of power project b. Procurement and supply at project site i. Solar photovoltaic modules/panels/array ii. Panel mounting structure iii. Solar tracker iv. Meteorological equipment v. Cables vi. Combiner box vii. Solar power conditioning unit viii. Inverter ix. Isolator x. Transformer xi. Switchbox xii. Conductor xiii. Battery xiv. Transmissi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ii. Battery xiv. Transmission tower xv. Steel/plastic tubes & pipes xvi. SCADA Software b. Equipment and components are delivered at project site and risk is transferred to the customer c. Payment is as per milestone or monthly depending on the % of goods delivered at site d. Full payment is released on successful commissioning of the plant with stipulated power generation. A. Scope of Erection Contract includes: a. Assembly & erection i. Assembly & erection ii. Supply of nut, bolts, fasteners and other miscellaneous materials b. Test & Commissioning B. Risk of Equipment and components are acquired by the Applicant during erection till successful handover of the plant to the customer C. Payment is as per milestone or monthly depending on the % of goods delivered at site D. Full payment is released on successful commissioning of the plant with stipulated power generation. E. Supply contract and Erection contract are two independent contract. However, a. Breach of one con
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ssue number 5, the statement of facts is as follows…. A. The scope of supply includes: a. Civil works i. leveling of ground ii. Wall boundary iii. internal roads iv. concrete foundations for mounting of panel mounting structures v. digging ditch for underground cabling vi. Concrete flooring for inverter/transformer/battery pack, vii. Control room etc. b. Detailed designing of power project c. Procurement and supply at project site i. Panel mounting structure ii. Solar tracker iii. Meteorological equipment iv. Cables v. Combiner box vi. Solar power conditioning unit vii. Isolator viii. Transformer ix. Switchbox ix. Conductor xi. Battery xii. Transmission tower xiii. Steel/plastic tubes & pipes xiv. Pre-fabricated shelter xv. SCADA Software d. Assembly & erection i. Assembly & erection ii. Supply of nut, bolts, fasteners and other miscellaneous materials e. Test & Commissioning B. Equipment and components are delivered at project site and stored at the risk of the Appli
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
als iii. Test & Commissioning A. Risk of Equipment and components are acquired by the Applicant during erection successful handover of the plant to the customer. B. Payment is as per milestone or monthly depending on the % of goods delivered at site Full payment is released on successful commissioning of the plant with stipulated power generation. And for Issue number 8, the statement of facts is as follows… The contract stipulated successive payment against successive statements depending on the milestone stipulated in the contract. On analyzing the Issues, with respect to the CGST/SGST Act, rules, and notifications released from time to time, it is to note Entry number 234 of Schedule I ( which are taxable @ 2.5% ) of notification 01/2017 -Central Tax ( Rate), dated :28 h June 2017, is relevant to the Issues raised by apolicant. Entry 234 reads as… S. No. Chapter/Heading/ Sub-heading/Tariff item Description of Goods 234 84 or 85 Following renewable energy devices & parts
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
) section 12(2, reads The time of supply of goods shall be the earlier of the following dates, namely:- (a) the date of issue of invoice by the supplier or the last date on which he is required, under sub-section (1) of section 31, to issue the invoice with respect to the supply; or (b) the date on which the supplier receives the payment with respect to the supply: Provided that where the supplier of taxable goods receives an amount up to one thousand rupees in excess of the amount indicated in the tax invoice, the time of supply to the extent of such excess amount shall, at the option of the said supplier, be the date of issue of invoice in respect of such excess amount. On plain reading of the above facts along with provisions of law, for the clarifications sought by the applicant along with rulings are as follows… RULING Issue No:1 Whether supply of solar power plant under Turnkey EPC Contract is supply of solar power generating system under Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notifica
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ystem under Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Central Tax (Rate) both dated 28 June 2017 and Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- State Tax (Rate) dated 29 June 2017. Issue No.3: Whether supply of solar power plant under Supply Contract is supply of solar power generating system under Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017-intergrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) both dated 28 June 2017 and Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- State Tax (Rate) dated 29 June 2017 where the assembly, erraction, and commissioning of the solar power plant is undertaken by the Applicant under a separate contract? Ruling : The applicant sought a clarification on the liability of division of contract into two, one is supply of
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ification No. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Central Tax (Rate) both dated 28 June 2017 and Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- State Tax (Rate) dated 29 June 2017 where the assembly, erection, and commissioning of the solar power plant is undertaken by a third party contractor? Ruling : In this scenario, the goods are supplied by one contractor, and the services were supplied by the other contractor. Therefore the rate of tax applicable for supply of goods as long as it satisfies the condition of being device and parts of the solar power generating system attracts 5% rate of tax as per Entry 234 of Schedule I of Notification No 1/2017 -Central tax (Rate), dated 28th June, 2017. Issue No.5: Whether supply of solar power plant under Balance of Plant Supply Contract is supply of solar power generating system under Entry 234 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate), Entry 234 of Schedule
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
GST – States – F. No.(3)/HR/DGST/2018/5220-29 – Dated:- 8-5-2018 – GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND TAXES (HUMAN RESOURCE BRANCH) VYAPAR BHAWAN, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002 NOTIFICATION F. No.(3)/HR/DGST/2018/5220-29 Dated: 08/05/2018 Appointment of Appellate Authority under DGST Act, 2017 In exercise of the power conferred upon me by sub-section (1) of section 5 read with clause (8) of section 2 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the ru
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
