Goods and Services Tax

Consolidated Premium Retailers, The R & R Marketing Company Versus The Principal Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Government of Tamil Nadu, Union of India, The Chairman, GSTIN
GST
2018 (7) TMI 1825 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 179 (Mad.)
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 17-7-2018
W. P. Nos. 11878 & 11879 of 2018
GST
T. S. Sivagnanam, J.
For the Petitioners : Mr.Adithya Reddy
For the Respondents : Mr.A.P.Srinivas, SPC, Mrs.G.Dhana Madhri, GA, Mr.V.Sundareswaran
ORDER
Heard both.
2. The sum and substance of the prayer of the petitioners is that they are unable to upload Form GST TRAN-1 to take credit of the input tax/ service tax/central excise duty availed by them at the time of migration within the time stipulated.
3. The petitioners would state that they were unable to upload Form GST TRAN-1 within the time stipulated on account of some error. Therefore, the petitioners seek for appropriate direction in this regard.
4. Similar prayers wer

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ty would consider and dispose of the same following the procedure laid down in para 8 of the circular dated 3.4.2018 and would take decision accordingly keeping in view that this writ petition remained pending since 26.3.2018.
8.With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stand finally disposed of.
5. So far as the High Court of Delhi is concerned, the Delhi High Court, in W.P(C) No.1300 of 2018 etc. batch by order dated 09.4.2018, directed the petitioners therein to approach the concerned Nodal Officer with brief representations outlining their grievances and the Nodal Officer or the Redressal Committee was directed to appropriately deal with representations in accordance with the circular dated 03.4.2018.
6. So far as the Kerala High Court is concerned, in W.P.No.17348 of 2018 by order dated 14.6.2018, the following direction has been issued:
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case as also the orders passed in similar matters, I deem it appropriate to disp

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

by a section of tax payers owing to technical glitches on the GST and representations were given by the petitioners. Therefore, the CBIC is setting up a Grievance Redressal Mechanism vide Circular No.39/13/2018-GST dated 03.4.2018. Paragraph 8 of the said circular would be relevant for the purpose of the cases on hand, which reads as under :
8. Resolution of stuck TRAN-1s and filing of GSTR-3B
8.1 A large number of taxpayers could not complete the process of TRAN-1 filing either at the stage of original or revised filing as they could not digitally authenticate the TRAN-1s due to IT related glitches. As a result, a large number of such TRAN-1s are stuck in the system. GSTN shall identify such taxpayers who could not file TRAN-1 on the basis of electronic audit trail. It has been decided that all such taxpayers, who tried but were not able to complete TRAN-1 procedure (original or revised of filing them on or before 27.12.2017 due to IT glitch, shall be provided the facility to com

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hall be completed by 31st May 2018.
9. Further, paragraph 5.1 of the said circular would state that GSTN, Central and State Government would appoint Nodal Officers in requisite number to address the problem a taxpayer faces due to glitches, if any, in the common portal. This would be publicized adequately.
10. An argument was advanced by the learned counsel for the assessees that paragraph 5 of the said circular dated 03.4.2018 is confined to non-TRAN-1 issues. However, this Court finds that there is no such specific distinction brought about in paragraph 5 of the said circular. Therefore, it can be safely held that the procedure of appointment of Nodal Officers and identification of issues are to be done in the manner provided in paragraph 5 of the said circular. Unless the Nodal Officers are appointed, the Jurisdictional officer of the Assessee, namely Assessing Officer would not be in a position to forward the representations/applications filed by the assessees pointing out the g

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

RATHEESH PROPRIETOR, M/s. KBM AGENCIES Versus SECRETARY TAXES, GOODS & SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE UNION SECRETARY, NEW DELHI, THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & STATE TAX OFFICER CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA, THEMATIC NODAL OFFICER, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, VAZHUCHERRY, THEMATIC NODAL OFFICER AND THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), VAZHUCHERRY
GST
2018 (7) TMI 1489 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 17-7-2018
W. P. (C) No. 21833 of 2018 (D)
GST
MR. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The Petitioner : Adv. Sri. A. Krishnan
For The Respondents : Sri. N. Nagaresh, Assistant Solicitor General And Smt Thushara James
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was a registered deale

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

dal Officers is to follow. It reads:
5. Nodal officers and identification of issues
5.1 GSTN, Central and State government would appoint nodal officers in requisite number to address the problem a taxpayer faces due to glitches, if any, in the Common Portal. This would be publicized adequately.
5.2 Taxpayers shall make an application to the field officers or the nodal officers where there was a demonstrable glitch on the Common Portal in relation to an identified issue, due to which the due process as envisaged in law could not be completed on the Common Portal.
5.3 Such an application shall enclose evidences as may be needed for an identified issue to establish bona fide attempt on the part of the taxpayer to comply with the due p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Radico Khaitan Limited Versus Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Delhi
Central Excise
2018 (7) TMI 1280 – DELHI HIGH COURT – 2018 (17) G. S. T. L. 582 (Del.)
DELHI HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 17-7-2018
SERTA 19/2018
Central Excise
MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA JJ.
Appellant Through: Mr. L. Badri Narayanan, Advocate with Mr. Yogendra Aldak, Mr. Karan Sachdev, Mr. Shrey Ashat, Ms. Apeksha Mehta and Mr. Kunal Kapoor, Advocates.
Respondent Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondent with Mr. Suresh Chaudhary, Advocate.
MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL)
CM APPL. 27730/2018 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
SERTA 19/2018 & CM APPL. 27729/2018 (for stay)
2. Issue notice.
3. Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondent accepts notice.
4. The appellant's grievance in the present proceedings under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is that the final order of the Customs, Excis

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t part of the order reflecting this aspect is as follows:-
“32. Now, the noticee has submitted the legal agreement dt : 30-06-2006 duly signed by them as well as by M/s Jefferies with their reply to the show cause notice and has also produced the same for my perusal at the time of personal hearing. I find in the fact and circumstances of the present case the very first issue before me is whether the agreement dated : 30-06-2006 is a legal document are not as alleged in the impugned SCN, in as much as classification of services received by the noticee depends upon the sanctity of the said agreement as the same was discarded by the department ab-initio on failure of the noticee to produce the signed copy during the course of investigation.
33. I find it is an admitted fact that according to the balance sheet for the year 2006-07 the noticee had raised foreign currency convertible bonds of US dollars 50 millions and had incurred a foreign currency expenditure of Rs. 11.47 crorres for ra

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d introduce potential purchasers to the company in connection with the purchase of securities.
35 to 43    xxx    xxx    xxx
44. Further I find the ibid letter of engagement dated 20-04-2006 was translated into a further legal agreement MOU between the parties vide subscription agreement dated 30-06-2006, duly signed, dated and delivered and is legally binding upon both the parties.
45. The subscription agreement dated 30-06-2006, inter alia, provides for the following clauses –
(a) Preamble/Details
The issuer proposes, subject to the compliances all conditions set out herein. To issue US $ 4,00,00,000 3.5% convertible bonds due 2011. In addition, the issuer grants the manager an option to subscribe or procure subscription for up to an additional US $ 100,00,000 3.5% convertible bonds due 2011.
(b) Issue of the bonds (Clause 3)
The issuer undertakes to the manager (subject to the terms and in accordance with provisions of this agreeme

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

is as per the provision of clause 5 of subscription agreement).
49. I further find that the subscription agreement dt : 30-06-2006 is the authentic, genuine and legally binding agreement and the so called agreement (letter of engagement) dated 20-04-2006 was not a binding agreement which is clearly evident from the following paras/language in the said letter dt : 20-04-2006.
(A) The final terms and conditions governing the transactions shall be mutually agreed between the company and Jefferies.
(B) The terms of the transaction will be governed by one or more definitive agreements. This agreement is not intended to constitute a binding agreement to consummate the transaction or to enter into any agreement in relation to the transaction nothing in this agreement shall give rise to any underwriting or purchase obligation on the part of Jefferies in relation to the transaction. Similarly, nothing in this agreement shall give rise to any obligation on the part of the company to issue or

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

consider that the said letter dated 20.04.2008 was a relevant evidence in the present case and established the fact that the foreign service provider was indeed engaged and appointed by the notice as lead manager and sole placement agent for certain purpose and provision of services for raising FCCB of US$50 Millions in the FY 2006-07. The adjudicating authority erred in taking into account only the agreement MOU between the said parties dated 20.04.2006. It is pertinent to take note of the relevant fact that the transaction between the parties were initiated only through letter agreement dated 20.04.2006 and it is relevant as to the purpose, the motive and the intention behind the transaction to be carried out between the parties. Also, it is not disputed that only the letter agreement dated 20-04-2006 was translated into a further agreement MOU between the parties vide subscription agreement dated 30-06-2006.
The adjudicating authority further failed to consider the essence and sub

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

service provider in relation to the raising FCCB of US $ 50 Millions. Therefore, the findings of the Adjudicating Authority were perverse to the extent that in terms of the later and binding agreement dated 30.06.2006, the service provided were 'underwriting service' and not 'Banking and Other Financial service'.”
8. In the impugned order the CESTAT noticed this aspect and remitted the matter for de novo fresh consideration by the Commissioner in the following terms.
“7. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of record, it appears that in the instance case the main controversy is pertaining to the agreement between the service provider and service recipient. It is the allegation that in the memorandum of understanding, the scope has been enhanced and the new document has been given at the time of adjudication. The contention of the department is that both the agreements has different contents. When it is so, then we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the or

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

on both the genuineness of the document (agreement dated 30.06.2006) as well as on its interpretation. Given these facts, if the Tribunal was in doubt as to whether the document was genuine, the least that it could have done was to limit the findings on remand while retaining Revenue's appeal on the file. This Court notices that CESTAT has been repeatedly passing remand orders virtually abdicating its responsibility as an Appellate Court. This trend is unhealthy given that it is the final Court of fact and is required to adjudicate both on the issues of fact and law, especially in matters such as the present one i.e. where the appeal before it was by way of the first appeal.
11. In these circumstances, this Court hereby sets aside the impugned order. The Tribunal is hereby directed to render specific findings on the issue after taking into account the submissions of the parties and calling for a limited remand findings on the issue of genuineness of the document alone.
The appeal st

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ITC ON CANTEEN
Query (Issue) Started By: – SURYAKANT MITHBAVKAR Dated:- 16-7-2018 Last Reply Date:- 21-7-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
We have provide CANTEEN facility to our employees free of cost.
Whether we are eligible for ITC Credit on purchase of goods for CANTEEN.
Reply By SHIVKUMAR SHARMA:
The Reply:
No.you are not eligible for ITC on purchase of goods for canteen, Which you are running for provide facility to your employee.
Reply By ANITA BHADRA:
T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tax rate for used machinery
Query (Issue) Started By: – Tharini R Dated:- 16-7-2018 Last Reply Date:- 18-7-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
We want to sell used plastic injection moulding machineries, kindly let me know the tax rate for the same.
Reply By Alkesh Jani:
The Reply:
Sir,
If the said machinery is older than 5 years and if you have not availed any credit in erstwhile law, than the value shall be the transaction value. The Rate is 18%. Sl.No. 330 Ch.8

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Custom Paddy Milling Not an Intermediate Plant Cultivation Process; GST Rate Set at 5.
Circulars
GST – States
Clarification on taxability of custom milling of paddy – Milling of paddy is not

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Exemption for State Govt General Insurance: Employees, Police, Electricity Dept, and Students Covered.
Circulars
GST – States
GST is not leviable on General Insurance policies provided by

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Section 25: GST Applies to Transactions Between Related Parties in Business, Even Without Consideration.
Circulars
GST – States
Supply of goods or services or both between related persons or

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Rate Maintained: Cutting and Packing Fabrics Doesn't Change Classification; 5% GST Still Applies.
Circulars
GST – States
Mere cutting and packing of fabrics into pieces of different lengt

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Applies to Services on Processed Agricultural Goods; Processing Beyond Farm Level Changes Classification.
Case-Laws
GST
Chargeability of tax/GST – Classification of goods – support services of loading, unloading, packaging, storage or warehousing of agriculture produce – if any processing is done on these products as is not usually done by a cultivator or producer at farm level then these would fall outside the definition of agricultural produce.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Bio-fertilizers without brand in non-unit containers have NIL GST; branded unit packs attract 5% GST.
Case-Laws
GST
Bio Fertilizer – rate of GST – Bio-Fertilizers, other than those put up in Unit Container and bearing a brand name will covered under Schedule I of rate of GST on Goods and would attracts NIL rate of duty and if the Bio-Fertiliser is put up in Unit Container and bears a brand name, it would be taxable under GST @ 5%.
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, anno

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER GST
By: – DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 16-7-2018

Appeal to Appellate Authority
Section 98(4) of Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 ('Act' for short) provides that where an application for advance ruling is admitted, the Authority for Advance Ruling shall, after examining such further material as may be placed before it by the applicant or obtained by the Authority and after providing an opportunity of being heard to the applicant or his authorized representative as well as to the concerned officer or his authorized representative, pronounce its advance ruling on the question specified in the application.
Section 100 of the Act provides the procedure for filing appeal against the order of the Authority for Advance Ruling before the Appellate Authority for Advance Rulings. The said section provides that the concerned officer, the jurisdictional officer or an applicant aggrieved by any adva

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

isions of this Chapter XVII, for the purposes of this Act, the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under the provisions of a State Goods and Services Tax Act or a Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act shall be deemed to be the Appellate Authority in respect of that State or Union territory.
State Appellate Authorities
The list of State Appellate Authorities appointed by the respective States are furnished as below-
Name of State/ Union Territory
Member – State Government
Member – Central Government
Office Address
Telephone/Fax Email id of office
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Chandigarh
Shri Ajit Balaji Joshi, IAS Excise & Taxation Commissioner
Deputy Commissioner Office, Sector 17, Chandigarh
0172-2700109 dc-chd@nic.in.
Andhra Pradesh
Sri. J. Syamala Rao, I.A.S., Chief Commissioner of State Tax, Andhra Prades
Sri. Y.S Shahrawath, I.R.S., Chief Commissioner of Central Tax – Visakhapatnam Zone
O/o Chief Commissioner of Central Tax & Customs, 1st Floor, GST B

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ioner of Commercial Tax, (Karnataka) Bengaluru
The Principal Chief Commissioner, Bengaluru, GST & CX Zone, Bengaluru
Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (Karnataka), Vanijya Terige Karyalaya, Kalidasa Road, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru560009
Tel.No.: 080-22262935; Fax No.: 080-22263595 email: cto.karbng@nic.in.
Kerala / Lakshadweep
Shri.Dr.Rajan N Khobragade IAS, Commissioner of State Tax
Shri. Pullela Nageswara Rao, IRS, Chief Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs
STATE: 9th Floor, Tax Towers, Killippalam, Karamana P.O., Thiruvananthapuram PIN695002 CENTRE: Office of the Chief Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs, Thiruvananthapuram Zone, Central Revenue Building, I.S.Press Road, Kochi-682 018
0471-2785202; 0471-2785203 cct.ctd@kerala.gov.in.
0484-2394100/0404 Fax: 0484-2397614 cccochin@nic.in
Maharashtra
Shri Rajiv jalota, Commissioner of State Tax
Ms.Sungita Sharma, Chief Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Mumbai Zone
15th F

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Taxes, Ezhilagam, No.3, Kamarjar Salai, Chepak, Chennai – 600 005.
Tel. No.:044-28521744; Fax.No.:044-28551864 email: cct@ctd.tn.gov.in.
Telangana
Sri. V. Anil Kumar, Commissioner of State Tax
Shri Bankey Behari Agrawal, Chief Commissioner, Central Tax and Customs
O/o Commissioner of State Tax, C.T.Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad
Tel.040-24652356 Fax.040-24618912 e-mail – tg_cct@tgct.gov.in.
Uttar Pradesh
Smt.Kamini Chauhan Ratan (IAS) Commissioner Commercial Tax Dept, UP
Sri P.M. Govande, Chief Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Lucknow Zone
4, Vibhuti Khnad, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow – 226010
0522 – 2721147 ctcomhqlu-up@nic.in 0522 – 2233136 ccu-cexlko@nic.in.
Uttarakhand
Smt. Sowjanya, Commissioner of State Tax, Uttarakhand
Shri S.H. Hasan, Chief Commissioner, Customs & CGST, Meerut Zone, Meeru
O/o the Commissioner of Commercial of CGST, Commissionerate, E-Block, Nehru Colony, Haridwar Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Ph.0135-2668668(O) Fax.0135-2668732 email-acdehradun@gmail.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

IN RE: M/s. M.U.N. AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.
GST
2018 (11) TMI 958 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 167 (A. A. R. – GST)
AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA – AAR
Dated:- 16-7-2018
GST-ARA-17/2018-19/B-68
GST
SHRI B.V. BORHADE, AND SHRI PANKAJ KUMAR, MEMBER
PROCEEDINGS
(Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017)
The present application has been filed under section 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. U.N. AGRO INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect on the following questions.
* Whether our product or goods fall under chapter tariff heading 0204 and exemption given to this tariff item vide Notification No. 02/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 is available to us or not ?
*

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

g on which neither we are printing or mentioning any specific weight nor we are supplying any fixed weight in one bag. Such bags are not exclusively used for packing meat. It is available in general market and used to pack anything like grains, pulses etc.
Our Question is, whether frozen meat supplied in such bag of different weight and size will be treated as frozen meat put up in unit container?
Submissions dated 13.07.2018.
As required by you in final hearing, we are submitting herewith as follows;
1. Copy of Tender Note (RFP)
2. Copy of Acceptance of Tender Note
3. Trade Mark Search Report (including Details of Class/ Goods covered)
4. Sample Purchase Order from Army (Demand for Contracted Items)
* Further we have to state that following are the two questions on which advance ruling was required;
a. Whether our product or goods fall under chapter tariff heading 0204 and exemption given to this tariff item vide Notification No. 02/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/20

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed goods for the purpose of indicating, or so as to indicate a connection in the course of trade between such specified goods and some person using such name or mark with or without any indication of the identity of that person, and which is registered under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
* According to explanation to 44/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 14/11/2017 following sub clause is substituted, namely:-
(b) The phrase “registered brand name” means, –
(A) a brand registered as on or after the 15th May 2017 under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 irrespective of whether or not the brand is subsequently de-registered;
(B) a brand registered as on or after the 15th May2017 under the Copyright Act, 1957(14 of 1957);
(C) a brand registered as on or after the 15th May 2017 under any law for the time being in force in any other country.”
* GST is charged only when all three conditions are satisfied. Out of three condition one important condition is that product must bear registered b

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

and that person.
* Therefore, we are of the view that our product is unbranded and exemption is available Vide Notification No. 44/2017 – Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 14/11/2017.
Statement of applicants interpretation of law in respect of question raised on which Advance Ruling is sought.
* Explanation (i) to notification 02/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017 have explained the phrase “Unit container” as a package, whether large Or small (for example Tin, can, box, jar, bottle, bag, or carton, drum, barrel, or canister) designed to hold a pre-determined quantity or number , which is indicated on such package.
* In our case, we are not mentioning or printing any weight / pre-determined quantity/number on such bag and also in one bag we are not packing Standard/ fixed quantity. Hence We are interpreting that our bag is not an unit container.
03. CONTENTION – AS PER THE CONCERNED OFFICER –
The submission, as reproduced verbatim, could be seen thus-
Submissions on 25.06.20

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he weight of carcass.
Point no. (4) – Notification No. 02/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) exempts the listed goods from whole of the Central Tax leviable. Tariff heading 0204 in said notification exempts Meat Of sheep or goats, fresh, chilled or frozen (other than frozen and put up in unit container), In the explanation given in the same Notification Unit Container is defined as follows:
The phrase “unit container” means a package, whether large or small (for example, tin, can, box, jar, bottle, bag, or carton, drum, barrel, or canister) designed to hold a predetermined quantity or number, which is indicated on such package.
Despite the applicant's contention that they are neither supplying any fixed weight in one bag nor mentioning any specific weight on the label, it should still qualify as “Unit Contained' as the weight or meat to be supplied is predetermined according to their contract (sample copy enclosed). Since the weight of the Carcass is weighed and labelled by the ap

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tification disallows exemption for meat which is frozen and put up in unit container.
04. HEARING
The case was taken up for preliminary hearing on dt. 26.06.2018, with respect to admission or rejection of the application when Sh. Yogesh Ratnani, C.A., and Sh. Prakash Morbia, Tax Consultant along with Sh. Mohammed Sufiyan Nagani, Director appeared and made contentions as per details in their ARA. The jurisdictional officer, Ms. Nishtha Sharma, Asstt. Commissioner of GST & CE, Division-III, Belapur Commissionerate appeared and made written submissions.
The application was admitted and final Hearing was held on 11.07.2018, Sh. Yogesh Ratnani, C.A., and Sh. Prakash Morbia, Tax Consultant along with Sh. Mohammed Sufiyan Nagani, Director appeared made contentions as per their ARA. They were requested to provide copy of Tender, Trade Mark Certificate class of goods covered by this trademark which they agreed to submit. The jurisdictional officer, Ms. Nishtha Sharma, Asstt. Commissioner o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

fixed weight in one bag. Such bags are not exclusively used for packing meat. It is available in general market and used to pack anything like grains, pulses etc. Applicant further submit that they are not mentioning or printing weight/ predetermined quantity or number on such bag. And also in one bag they are not packing standard / fixed quantity. On this set of facts applicant submits that the impugned bag in which frozen carcass is supplied is not a unit container as defined in the notification 1/2017 and 2/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017.
From the facts as narrated above and for the fact that they are also supplying meat as per Tender of the Indian Army under similar terms and conditions, we find that these facts are similar to the facts recorded by us in the Advance Ruling already given in case of M/s. Monrovia Leasing and Finance Pvt Ltd bearing order No. GST-ARA-20/ 2017-18/B-83, Mumbai, dated 04/08/2018 = 2018 (10) TMI 1244 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARAS

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rinting or marking of weight or number of carcass packed in such bags and there is no mentioning of brand name. Further the tender pursuant to which impugned supplies are to take place there is no requirement of from Army regarding mentioning weight or number on the packaging material. Whereas in case of M/s. Ahmednagar District Goat Rearing and Procession Co-operative Federation Ltd packaging conditions mentioned in Terms and Conditions “RFP” given by Army required mentioning of actual weight on the secondary packaging. In this regard appellant submitted letter dated 28/05/2017 issued by Col. S. HQ Southern Command Pune with following declaration-
“It is certified that chilled/frozen chicken/meat is supplied to the Army by various firms through Annual Contracts. As per order on the subject, the net weight / numbers of the item is not required to be mentioned on the packaging”
Thus the issue before us is whether such supply is covered by the expressions 'unit container' as

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r is mentioned on packages. In view of above we are convinced that impugned supply would not satisfy the requirement of the definition of 'unit container' as found in both the notification cited supra. In this view of the matter, we hold that the supply of whole sheep/goat carcass in frozen state packed in LDPE bag and further packed in HDPE bag which do not indicate any information related to weight/number of the carcass packed in such bags as product not put up in a unit container and bearing a brand name for the purpose of notification 01/2017and 2/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June, 2017.
For above discussion we do not find any cogent reason to deviate from the view which we have already taken. Accordingly we hold that the frozen meat of sheep / goat in HDPE gunny bag which do not indicate any information related to weight / number of carcass packed in such bags would tantamount to being as a product not put up in unit container and thus falls under chapter tariff headin

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Sundaram Asset Management Company Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer Commissionerate
Service Tax
2018 (9) TMI 1206 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 16-7-2018
ST/EH/40267/2018 in ST/40538/2018 – Misc. Order No. 40567/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri Rajaram Ramanan, Consultant for the Appellant
Shri A. Cletus, Addl. Commissioner (AR) for the R

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Madeena Constructions Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai
Service Tax
2018 (9) TMI 1205 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 16-7-2018
ST/ROA/40305/2018 and ST/Misc. /30306/2018 in ST/538/2010 – Misc. Order No. 40572-40573/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri J. Shankar Raman, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri A. Cletus, Addl. Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Ms. Sulekha Beevi,
The above application is filed by the appellant seeking to restore the appeal that was dismissed vide Final Order No. 40795/2013 dated 7.6.2013.
2. On behalf of the appellant, Shri J. Shankar Raman, ld. counsel subm

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ssal of the appeal. The appellant had applied by RTI to ensure whether the final order was served upon them. Information was received that the final order was dispatched by the Tribunal and there is no proof that it was delivered to the appellant. Therefore, the ld. counsel prayed that the appeal may be restored to the file. The appellant has also filed another miscellaneous application seeking to modify the stay order passed by the Tribunal directing to predeposit Rs. 28.90 lakhs.
3. The ld. AR Shri A. Cletus opposed the application. He submitted that nearly five years have elapsed after dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance of predeposit. The appellant was represented by its counsel on both the dates when the miscellaneous order was

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

as directed to be complied on or before 23.5.2013, the same was not complied and appeal dismissed on 7.6.2013. The appellant was represented by his counsel on the said day and it was reported that the compliance has not been made. Thereupon, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-compliance. We find no grounds to restore the appeal which has been dismissed for non-compliance of predeposit. Althrough, the appellant was represented by his counsel and therefore cannot contend that he was not aware of dismissal of appeal for non-compliance. Further, the ROA application is made with a delay of about five years. The ROA as well as miscellaneous application are dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
Case laws, Decisions, Judgem

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Schwing Stetter India Private Limited Versus The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN), Goods and Services Tax Council (GST Council), Union of Inida And Government of Tamil Nadu
GST
2018 (9) TMI 684 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – 2018 (17) G. S. T. L. 589 (Mad.)
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 16-7-2018
W. P. No. 3117, 11388, 15846, 15612, 15912, 13536, 12986, 17630, 12987, 1019 of 2018 and 33193 of 2017 W. M. P. Nos. 13291, 18847, 1230 of 2018 and 36608 of 2017
GST
Mr. T. S. Sivagnanam J.
For the Petitioner : Mr.Karthick Sundaram
For the Respondents : Mr.A.P.Srinivas, Senior Panel Counsel, Mr.V.Sundareswaran, Senior Panel Counsel, Ms.R.Hemalatha, Senior Panel Counsel, Ms.Aparna Nandakumar, Senior Panel Counsel for GST, Ms.G.Dhanamadhri And Government Advocate (T)
COMMON ORDER
In the batch of cases, there are varied prayers sought by the petitioners.
The sum and substance of the prayer of the petitioners is that they are unable to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

/ GST has issued order dated 5.4.2018 in which Nodal Officers have already been appointed by the State Government. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to approach the Nodal Officer of Dhamtari i.e., Assistant Commissioner, State GST, Raipur Circle – 7 within four days from today by filing representation along with all necessary documents for redressal of his grievance and in turn, the said authority would consider and dispose of the same following the procedure laid down in para 8 of the circular dated 3.4.2018 and would take decision accordingly keeping in view that this writ petition remained pending since 26.3.2018.
8.With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stand finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).”
4. So far as the High Court of Delhi is concerned, the Delhi High Court in W.P(C) No.1300 of 2018 and batch dated 09.04.2018 directed the petitioners to approach the concerned Nodal Officer with brief representations outlining their grievances and the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

r reasons not attributable to him, appropriate action shall be taken to enable him to take credit of the input tax available to him at the time of migration.
6. The learned counsels appearing for the petitioners would submit that identical directions may be issued in this batch of cases as well.
7. It was brought to the notice of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes (CBIC) and Customs that about difficulties faced by section of tax payers owing to technical glitches on the GST and representations were given by the petitioners. Therefore, CBIC is setting up a Grievance Redressal Mechanism vide Circular No.39/13/2018- GST dated 03.04.2018. Paragraph 8 of the Circular would be relevant for the purpose of the cases on hand.
“8.Resolution of stuck TRAN-1s and filing of GSTR-3B
8.1 A large number of taxpayers could not complete the process of TRAN-1 filing either at the stage of original or revised filing as they could not digitally authenticate the TRAN-1s due to IT related glitches.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

3.GSTN shall communicate directly with the taxpayers in this regard and submit a final report to GIC about the number of TRAN-1s filed and submitted through this process.
8.4.The taxpayers shall complete the process of filing of TRAN 1 stuck due to IT glitches, as discussed above, by 30th April 2018 and the process of completing filing of GSTR 3B which could not be filed for such TRAN 1 shall be completed by 31st May 2018.”
8. With regard to the request made by the petitioner in W.P.No.3117 of 2018, paragraph 5.1 of the circular would state that GSTN, Central and State Government would appoint nodal officers in requisite number to address the problem a taxpayer faces due to glitches, if any, in the Common Portal. This would be publicized adequately.
9. An argument was advanced by the learned counsel for the assessees that Paragraph 5 of the circular dated 03.04.2018 is confined to non-TRAN-1 issues. However, I find there is no such specific distinction brought about in paragraph

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ointed by GSTN and Commissioner of GST and Central excise (outer).
11. Thus, writ petitions stand disposed of with the following direction:
1) The respective Commissioner of GST and Central excise are directed to appoint the Nodal Officer / Officers for the State of Tamil Nadu, if not already appointed, within a period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
2) The petitioners/ Assessees are directed to submit their applications in accordance with Paragraph 8 of the Circular dated 03.04.2018 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to their respective Assessing Officers / jurisdictional officer/GST Officers. The Assessing Officers are directed to forward the application to the Nodal Officers within a period of one week. The Nodal Officer nominated will, in consultation with the GSTN shall take note of the grievances expressed by the petitioners/assessees and forward the same to the grievance committee, who in turn would tak

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

B.M. Reeja, M/s. Samrudhi Sanitary Wares, Neyyattinkara Versus The State Tax Officer
GST
2018 (8) TMI 1649 – KERLA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERLA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 16-7-2018
W. P. (C). No. 23117 of 2018 (L)
GST
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
Petitioners: By Advs. Sri. U. Balagangadharan Sri. V. Jayanandakumar
Respondents: R By Sri. P.R. Sreejith R By Government Pleader, Sri. Shamsudheen V.K. R By Sreelal N. Warrier, SC, Central Board of Excise & Amp; Customs
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, now migrated to the Goods and Services Tax regime. To use the input tax available to his credit at the time of migration, the petitioner had to upload FORM GST TRAN-1 within the stipul

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

in requisite number to address the problem a taxpayer faces due to glitches, if any, in the Common Portal. This would be publicized adequately.
5.2 Taxpayers shall make an application to the field officers or the nodal officers where there was a demonstrable glitch on the Common Portal in relation to an identified issue, due to which the due process as envisaged in law could not be completed on the Common Portal.
5.3 Such an application shall enclose evidences as may be needed for an identified issue to establish bona fide attempt on the part of the taxpayer to comply with the due process of law.
5.4 These applications shall be collated by the nodal officer and forwarded to GSTN who would on receipt of application examine the same. GS

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s T.S. Tech Sun Rajasthan Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE &CGST, Alwar
Central Excise
2018 (8) TMI 1091 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 16-7-2018
Ex. Appeal No. 51465 of 2018 – A/52554/2018-EX[DB]
Central Excise
Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) And Ms. Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial)
Sh. G. G. Gupta, Advocate for the appellant
Ms. Tamana Alam, AR for the Respondent
ORDER
Per: V. Padmanabhan:
The present appeal is against the Order-in-Appeal No. 87/(AK)CE/JPR/2017 dated 14.03.2017 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & CGST, Jaipur.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of automobile components and is situated in Neemrana where they are entitled to VAT subsidy under Rajasthan Investment Promotion Policy-2003. The Department noticed that they have not paid duty on value including the investment subsidy against Entitlement Certificate sanctioned under the above policy. Accordingly, duty demands wer

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s. Tamana Alam, ld. AR. She reiterated the finding of the lower authority.
5. After hearing both sides and on perusal of record including the order of the Tribunal, we note that the issue of liability of payment of excise duty on the subsidy amounts has been decided in favour of the appellant vide the order cited by the appellant. The observation of the Tribunal are reproduced below for ready reference:
“1. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants have established their factories in the State of Rajasthan and were operating under Rajasthan Investment Promotion Scheme which was notified by the Government of Rajasthan with the objective of facilitating investment in the establishment of new enterprises under the various schemes of Rajasthan Government. The appellants (assessees) were eligible for subsidies as per the various schemes applicable to the assesses and they were required to deposit VAT/CST/SGST at the applicable rate with the Government and in terms of the scheme

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CESTAT-DEL where it was observed that:-
7. We have heard both sides at length and perused the appeal record. As out lined above, the appellants are covered by the Investment Promotion Schemes of the Rajasthan Government. In terms of the various schemes of the Rajasthan Government, the appellants are required to discharge their VAT liability by making payment of the same. Out of such VAT credited to the Government, a certain portion is disbursed back to them in the form of subsidies. Such disbursement happens in the form of VAT 37 B, challan which can be utilized in subsequent periods to discharge VAT liability. The crux of the dispute in the present case is whether such subsidy amounts are required to be included in the assessable value of the goods manufactured by the appellants, in terms of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. As per the concept of transaction value outlined in Section 4, with effect from 01/07/2000, any sales tax/VAT actually paid can be deducted from the transac

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

the VAT recovered by them at the time of sale of the goods manufactured. A part of such VAT is given back to them in the form of subsidy in Challan 37 B. Such Challans are as good as cash but can be used only for payment of VAT in the subsequent period. In terms of the scheme of the Government of Rajasthan payment of VAT using such Challan are considered legal payments of tax. In view of the above, Revenue is not correct in taking the view that VAT liability discharged by utilizing such subsidy challans cannot be taken as VAT actually paid.
10. It is pertinent to reproduce the observations of the Tribunal in the Welspun Corporation Ltd. case
“5.1 The Respondent company opted for “Remission of Tax Scheme” and was thus eligible for the Capital subsidy in the form of remission of Sales Tax subject to the conditions to be fulfilled…. The subsidy in the form of remission of sales tax was in fact a percentage of capital investment… Separate assessment orders were thus issued by th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

The Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (Seventeenth Amendment) Rules, 2018.
KA.NI.-2-1311/XI-9(42)/17 Dated:- 16-7-2018 Uttar Pradesh SGST
GST – States
Uttar Pradesh SGST
Uttar Pradesh SGST
Uttar Pradesh Shasan
Sansthagat Vitta, Kar Evam Nibandhan Anubhag -2
NOTIFICATION
NO.KA.NI.-2-1311/XI-9(42)/17-U.P.GST Rules-2017-ORDER-(130)-2018,
Lucknow : Dated : 16-7-2018
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (U.P Act No. 1 of 2017), read with section 21 of the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1904 (U.P. Act No. 1 of 1904), the Governor is pleased to make the following rules with a view amending the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:-
Short title and commencement
1. (1) These Rules may be called the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (Seventeenth Amendment) Rules, 2018.
(2) Save as otherwise provided, they shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from 13th day of J

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

:-
Maximum Refund Amount = {(Turnover of inverted rated supply of goods and services) x Net ITC ÷ Adjusted Total Turnover} – tax payable on such inverted rated supply of goods and services.
Explanation:- For the purposes of this sub-rule, the expressions –
(a) Net ITC shall mean input tax credit availed on inputs during the relevant period other than the input tax credit availed for which refund is claimed under sub-rules (4A) or (4B) or both; and
(b) Adjusted Total turnover shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in sub-rule (4).”
Amendment of rule 95.
5. In the said rules, in rule 95, in sub-rule (3), for clauses (a), the following shall be substituted and deemed to have been substituted with effect from 01st July, 2017, namely:-
“(a) the inward supplies of goods or services or both were received from a registered person against a tax invoice;”;
Amendment of rule 97.
6. In the said rule 97, in sub-rule (1), after the proviso, the following proviso shall be ins

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nt including interest not returned, as the case may be;
(c) the deposit of an amount equivalent to fifty per cent. of the amount determined under the above clause in the Fund constituted under section 57 and the remaining fifty per cent. of the amount in the Fund constituted under section 57 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 of the concerned State, where the eligible person does not claim return of the amount or is not identifiable;
(d) imposition of penalty as specified under the Act; and
(e) cancellation of registration under the Act.
Explanation: For the purpose of this sub-rule, the expression, “concerned State” means the State in respect of which the Authority passes an order.”;
Amendment of rule 138.
8. In the said rule 138, in sub-rule (14), after clause (n), the following clause shall be inserted, namely:-
“(o) where empty cylinders for packing of liquefied petroleum gas are being moved for reasons other than supply.”;
Amendment of FORM GSTR-4.
9. in the sai

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M GST RFD-01, in Annexure-1,
(a) for Statement 1A, the following Statement shall be substituted, namely:-
“Statement 1A
[see rule 89(2)(h)]
Refund Type: ITC accumulated due to inverted tax structure [clause (ii) of first proviso to section 54(3)]
Sl.No
Details of invoices of inward supplies received
Tax paid on inward supplies
Details of invoices of outward supplies issued
Tax paid on outward supplies
GSTIN of the supplier
No.
Date
Taxable Value
Integrated Tax
Central Tax
State Tax/Union territory Tax
No.
Date
Taxable Value
Integrated Tax
Central Tax
State Tax/Union territory Tax
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
.”
(b) for Statement 5B, the following Statement shall be substituted, namely:-
“Statement 5B
[see rule 89(2)(g)]
Refund Type: On account of deemed exports
(Amount in Rs)
Sl.No.
Details of invoices of outward supplies in case refund is claimed by supplier/Details of invoices of inward supplies in case refund is claimed by recipient
T

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

The Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2018.
G.O.Ms. No. 131 Dated:- 16-7-2018 Telangana SGST
GST – States
Telangana SGST
Telangana SGST
GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA
Revenue (CT-II) Department
G.O.Ms. No. 131
Dated: 16-07-2018
NOTIFICATION
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No.23 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following Rules further to amend the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:-
(1) These Rules may be called the Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2018.
(2) Save as otherwise provided, they shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
2. In the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017,-
(i) in rule 37, in sub-rule (1), after the proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:-
“Provided further that the value of supplies on account of any amount added in accordance

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s (4A) or (4B) or both; and
(b) Adjusted Total turnover shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in sub-rule (4).”
(iv) with effect from 01st July, 2017, in rule 95, in sub-rule (3), for clause (a), the following shall be substituted, namely:-
“(a) the inward supplies of goods or services or both were received from a registered person against a tax invoice;”;
(v) in rule 97, in sub-rule (1), after the proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:-
“Provided further that an amount equivalent to fifty per cent. of the amount of cess determined under sub-section (5) of section 54 read with section 11 of the Goods and Services Tax (Compensation to States) Act, 2017 (15 of 2017), shall be deposited in the Fund.”;
(vi) in rule 133, for sub-rule (3), the following shall be substituted, namely:-
“(3) Where the Authority determines that a registered person has not passed on the benefit of the reduction in the rate of tax on the supply of goods or services or the benefit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he purpose of this sub-rule, the expression, “concerned State” means the State in respect of which the Authority passes an order.”;
(vii) in rule 138, in sub-rule (14), after clause (n), the following clause shall be inserted, namely:-
“(o) where empty cylinders for packing of liquefied petroleum gas are being moved for reasons other than supply.”;
(viii) in FORM GSTR-4, in the Instructions, for Sl. No. 10, the following shall be substituted, namely:-
“10. For the tax periods July, 2017 to September, 2017, October, 2017 to December, 2017, January, 2018 to March, 2018 and April, 2018 to June, 2018, serial 4A of Table 4 shall not be furnished.”;
(ix) with effect from 01st July, 2017, in FORM GST PCT-01, in PART B,
(a) against Sl. No. 4, after entry (10), the following shall be inserted, namely:-
“(11) Sales Tax practitioner under existing law for a period of not less than five years
(12) tax return preparer under existing law for a period of not less than five years”;
(b) after

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

be substituted, namely:-
“Statement 5B
[see rule 89(2)(g)]
Refund Type: On account of deemed exports
(Amount in Rs)
Sl.No.
Details of invoices of outward supplies in case refund is claimed by supplier/Details of invoices of inward supplies in case refund is claimed by recipient
Tax paid
GSTIN of the supplier
No.
Date
Taxable Value
Integrated Tax
Central Tax
State Tax/Union territory Tax
Cess
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
.”
(xi) in FORM GST RFD-01A, in Annexure-1,
(a) for Statement 1A, the following Statement shall be substituted, namely:-
“Statement 1A
[see rule 89(2)(h)]
Refund Type: ITC accumulated due to inverted tax structure [clause (ii) of first proviso to section 54(3)]
Sl.No
Details of invoices of inward supplies received
Tax paid on inward supplies
Details of invoices of outward supplies issued
Tax paid on outward supplies
GSTIN of the supplier
No.
Date
Taxable Value
Integrated Tax
Central Tax
State Tax/Union territory Tax
No.
Date
Taxable Val

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Usha Fabs Versus Commissioner of Goods And Service Tax
Service Tax
2018 (8) TMI 363 – DELHI HIGH COURT – TMI
DELHI HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 16-7-2018
W.P.(C) 6561/2018 & CM APPL. 25039-40/2018
Service Tax
MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. A. K. CHAWLA JJ.
Petitioner Through: Mr. Alok Yadav, Advocate.  
Respondent Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondent.  
O R D E R  
CM APPL. 25040/2018 (for exemption)  
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 6561/2018 & CM APPL. 25039/2018 (for stay)
The petitioner's grievance is with respect to the lack of jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax (West). It was issued show cause notice on 19.10.2017 by the Commi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Sixth Amendment) Rules, 2018
G.O.Ms.No. 133 Dated:- 16-7-2018 Telangana SGST
GST – States
Telangana SGST
Telangana SGST
GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA
Revenue (CT-II) Department
G.O.Ms.No. 133
Dated: 16-07-2018
NOTIFICATION
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 164 of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No. 23 of 2017), the State Government hereby makes the following Rules further to amend the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:-
(1) These Rules may be called the Telangana Goods and Services Tax (Sixth Amendment) Rules, 2018.
(2) Save as otherwise provided in these Rules, they shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

any of the Goods and Services Tax Identification Numbers for the purposes of the said Chapter XVI.”;
(ii) in rule 138C, after sub-rule (1), the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:-
“Provided that where the circumstances so warrant, the Commissioner, or any other officer authorized by him, may, on sufficient cause being shown, extend the time for recording of the final report in Part B of FORM EWB- 03, for a further period not exceeding three days.
Explanation.- The period of twenty four hours or, as the case may be, three days shall be counted from the midnight of the date on which the vehicle was intercepted.”;.
(iii) in rule 142, in sub-rule (5), after the words and figures “of section 76”, the words and figures “or section 1

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD. Versus STATE TAX OFFICER, INVESTIGATION BRANCH, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KOLLAM, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THE BRANCH MANAGER, ICICI BANK LTD, KOLKATTA AND STATE OF KERALA STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
GST
2018 (7) TMI 1636 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2018 (18) G. S. T. L. 29 (Ker.)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 16-7-2018
W. P. (C). No. 23251 of 2018
GST
MR. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The Petitioner : Adv.Sri.Tomson T.Emmanuel
For The Respondent : Smt. Thushara, Sri. Rajesh B., SC, Sri. Lal K. Joseph And Sreelal N. Warrier, SC
JUDGMENT
The

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ral mondalities have yet to be finalised. In the meanwhile, if the respondents invoke the bank guarantee, the petitioner's right to statutory remedies becomes illusory.
3. The learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, has submitted that the petitioner has an efficacious alternate remedy and, so, can approach the appellate authority.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.
5. Indeed, in terms of Section 107 of the Act, read with Rule 108 of the Goods and Services Tax Rules, to appeal, the petitioner has three months' time from the date of Ext.P8 impugned order. The 7th respondent is the appellate authority. Because the petitioner has three months' time to appeal, it may be i

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Cotton City Developers Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Service Tax
2018 (7) TMI 1389 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 16-7-2018
Appeal No. ST/275/2011 – Final Order No. 42035 / 2018
Service Tax
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member ( Judicial ) And Hon'ble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member ( Technical )
Shri M. Karthikeyan, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC ( AR ) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
Brief facts are that the appellants were providing construction service under Commercial or Industrial Construction Service and residential complex service. During the course of scrutiny of ST-3 returns, it was noticed by the department that even though they were continuing with providing of taxable service under Commercial or Industrial Construction Service and the construction of residential complex service, they stopped paying service tax from October 2006 onwards. They had thus not paid service

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

te contract can be subjected to levy of service tax only from1.6.2007 under works contract service. With regard to the demand of service tax after 1.6.2007, he submitted that when the said services fall under Works Contract Service prior to 1.6.2007, the demand for the same under construction of residential complex service cannot sustain, since the projects are ongoing projects from 2006 – 09. He relied upon the Board Circular No. 332/35/2006-TRU dated 18.2006 to contend that when the construction activities have been carried out by engaging a contractor, then the liability to pay service tax is on the contractor and not on the developer / promoter. The appellant being a promoter / developer, is not liable to pay service tax. That the contractor has already discharged the service tax on the very same construction activities of these two complexes, the demand cannot sustain.
3. The ld. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy supported the findings in the impugned order. He referred to Circular No

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

g the services of a contractor is not liable to pay service tax and it is the contractor who is liable to pay. Undisputedly, the contractor has discharged the service tax on the construction activities. The demand is made against the appellant merely alleging that he is the main contractor and although the contractor has discharged the service tax, it is only the sub-contractor and therefore the appellant is liable to pay service ax. We do not find any merit in this allegation of the department. The construction services had already suffered service tax as the contractor who is engaged in the construction of building/complex has discharged service tax. Further, the circular also makes it clear that when a contractor is engaged in construction of residential complex, the liability is on the contractor to pay the service ax. The Tribunal in the case of Logos Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai – 2018 (6) TMI 1361 had occasion to consider a similar issue and

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST ON TRANSPORTATION CHARGES COLLECTED BY SCHOOL FROM STUDENTS
Query (Issue) Started By: – rajesh marwaha Dated:- 15-7-2018 Last Reply Date:- 18-8-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
Our Client is a primary school. They collect Transportation charges from students. They have engaged vans to pick and drop students, whom they pay on monthly basis.
The turnover of school is above ₹ 20.00 Lacs.
Is the charging of Transportation expenses liable to GST?
Reply By

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =