Treatment in GSTR 1 if Advance refunded to party in subsequent month

Treatment in GSTR 1 if Advance refunded to party in subsequent month
Query (Issue) Started By: – SHRIRAM AGRAWAL Dated:- 10-7-2018 Last Reply Date:- 12-7-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
If have received an advance from our customer in May' 2018 and paid GST on the same by disclosing the same under advance received in GSTR 1 however, later on in the month of June' 2018, the advance was refunded to party due to some issues. Now where we can adjust this refund of advance in GSTR 1 of June' 2018.
Reply By Alkesh Jani:
The Reply:
Sir,
In this regards, Section 31 (3)(e) of the CGST Act, 2017 is reproduced below:-
“(e) where, on receipt of advance payment with respect to any supply of goods or servi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Stakeholder Consultation on Proposed Changes to GST Laws

Stakeholder Consultation on Proposed Changes to GST Laws
GST
Dated:- 10-7-2018

In order to engage with the stakeholders and invite comments from the public at large, the Department of Revenue has decided to make available the proposed amendments in CGST Act, 2017, IGST Act, 2017 and the GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017 in the public domain. The draft proposals for amendments can be seen here. You are invited to submit your comments/feedback on the draft proposals for amendmen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Entity Accused of Fake GST Invoices Granted Bail with Condition to Deposit 39 Crores.

Entity Accused of Fake GST Invoices Granted Bail with Condition to Deposit 39 Crores.
Case-Laws
GST
Fraudulent issuance of tax invoices under GST – allegation of business of generating and se

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

SGST credit taken from Hotel Bill

SGST credit taken from Hotel Bill
Query (Issue) Started By: – Kalpessh Daftary Dated:- 10-7-2018 Last Reply Date:- 13-7-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 6 Replies
GST
We are registered under GST from Mumbai and we avail facility from Gujarat State ( We pay out Hotel bill Room tariff ) which has CGST amount and SGST amount classified in their bills. Are we liable to claim CGST and SGST against the said bills.
Kalpesh Daftary
Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan:
The Reply:
Sir,
According to Section 12 (3) (b) of IGST Act, 2017, " the place of supply of services by way of lodging accommodation by a hotel, inn, guest house, home stay, club or campsite, by whatever name called, and including a house boat or any other ve

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

C of CGST and SGST paid in Gujarat State.
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani:
The Reply:
You are not eligible to take credit in this situation.
Reply By Alkesh Jani:
The Reply:
Dear Experts,
In this case, for my knowledge, can the person take ITC of CGST ignoring SGST?
Thanks
Reply By Himansu Sekhar:
The Reply:
Please look into the Sec. 49(4) of SGST Act,2017 wherein it is written that:
(4) The amount available in the credit ledger may be used for payment towards the output tax under this Act……..
It means MGST is different from GGST. The MGST cannot be utilised for GGST.
The tax invoice issued under Sec. 31 of MGST Act, will not be valid document for taking credit under Sec. 16 of the GGST Act.
Also there is no provision that CGST pa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ITC ON HOTEL STAY AND FOOD FOR DIRECTORS/MANAGERS

ITC ON HOTEL STAY AND FOOD FOR DIRECTORS/MANAGERS
Query (Issue) Started By: – SAFETAB LIFESCIENCE Dated:- 10-7-2018 Last Reply Date:- 11-7-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
Dear Experts,
Our Directors/Managers visiting outstation on business trip .
Please clarify whether we are eligible for ITC for the following cases.
1. IGST charged on Lodging Bills of Other state hotels.
2. IGST charged on Food Bills of Other state hotels.
3. CGST + SGST charged on Lodging Bills of Local state Hotels where our GST registration is held.
4. CGST + SGST charged on Food Bills of Local state bills where our GST registration is held.
Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan:
The Reply:
Sir,
According to Section 12 (3) (b) of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ral tax.
However the scheme of GST Act seems to be that GST Registration is State specific. Outside the State such person is an "un-registered person".
Therefore, in view of the above hotel owners in a State are liable to charge /cgst and SGST and not IGST though their customers belong to other State. According to Section 49 (5) (e) & (f) of CGST Act, 2017 "the amount of input tax credit available in the electronic credit ledger of the registered person on account of the central tax shall not be utilised towards payment of State tax or Union territory tax and the State tax or Union territory tax shall not be utilised towards payment of central tax. In view of the above my view is that you cannot avail the credit of said tax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani:
The Reply:
Sir, you can take credit of the CGST and SGST charged by the hotel in the State where you have registration. The food bill is not eligible for credit as it falls under personal consumption which is excluded in Sec 17(5) of CGST Act.
The hotel cannot charge IGST. The provision stated by Sri Rajagopalan Sir supports this view.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Admissibility of ITC depends on the major factor whether IGST is applicable or CGST & SGST and applicable of these taxes depends upon the determination of place of supply.
In my view in this regard, Rule of thumb is as under:-
(i) If there is movement of goods from one State to another State IGST is applicable. Similarly, if there is a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Blue Dart Aviation Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai, CGST & Central Excise, Chennai

Blue Dart Aviation Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai, CGST & Central Excise, Chennai
Service Tax
2018 (9) TMI 1721 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
ST/186/2011, ST/51/2012, ST/40420/2014, ST/41146/2014, ST/41211/2016, ST/41212/2016, ST/41244/2018, ST/41245/2018 – FINAL ORDER No. 42278-42285/2018
Service Tax
Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) And Shri P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial)
Shri N. Venkatraman, Sr. Advocate, Shri Akil Suresh, Advocate For the Appellant
Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) For the Respondent
ORDER
Per Madhu Mohan Damodhar
The appellants are engaged in transportation of goods through Air. They are providing service mainly to their associate company, M/s.Blue Dart Express Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as BDL) for ferrying cargo and documents to different parts of the country. Appellants acquired on lease, aircraft from foreign company for transportation of cargo. The aircraft is operate

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ppeared that appellants have wrongly taken credit in respect of excise duty paid on motor vehicles amounting to Rs. 4,92,474/-. Accordingly a show cause notice dt. 22.06.2009 was issued to appellants, inter alia proposing demand of the said tax amount with interest thereon and also imposition of penalties under various provisions of law.
2.4. Another SCN dt. 12.04.2010 was issued proposing demand of service tax liability of Rs. 4,61,47,535/- with interest thereon for the subsequent period November 2008 to September 2009 in respect of alleged “Supply of Tangible Goods Service” received by appellants with respect to lease of the aircraft from foreign lessor and imposition of penalties.
2.5. On the same issue, subsequent SCN dt. 14.09.2010 proposed demand of service tax liability of Rs. 2,01,16,640/- with interest for the period July 2009 to September 2010 on supply of „Tangible Goods Service‟.
2.6 Yet another SCN dt. 29.08.2011 was issued on the very same issue, inter alia

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

icle, under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004
No
Appeal No.ST/26/2011
November 2008 to September 2009
4,61,47,535
Rs.200 per day or 2% of the service tax demand per month whichever is higher subject to maximum of service tax payable, under Section 76
Supply of tangible goods
No
July 2009 to February 2010
2,01,16,640
Supply of tangible goods
No
Appeal No.ST/40420/2014
April 2010 to March 2011
1,88,99,721
Rs.200 per day or 2% of the service tax demand per month whichever is higher subject to maximum of service tax payable, under Section 76
Supply of tangible goods
No
Appeal No.ST/41146/2014
April 2011 to March 2012
7,10,77,525
Rs.200 per day or 2% of the service tax demand per month whichever is higher subject to maximum of service tax payable for period 1 April 2011 to 7 April 2011, under Section 76
Supply of tangible goods
No

Rs.100 per day or 1% of the service tax demand per month whichever is higher subject to maximum of service tax payable for period 8 April 2

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

h the agreements to emphasize that as per para-5 of Article 3, the basic rent was required to be paid monthly in arrears. As per Article 5, the possession and control of the aircraft was at all times with the appellant as lessee. Appellant was also required to service, repair, maintain etc. the aircraft at their own cost. The agreement also required the appellant to cause aircrafts to be duly registered in India. As per Article 6, appellant was only required to replace all parts which have become unserviceable, louse lost, stolen etc. at their own cost and expenses. In these circumstances, as the effective possession and control of the aircraft was with the appellant at all times. The transaction could not have been brought within the fold of “Supply of Tangible Goods Service” performed by the foreign lessor.
3.2 Further, the scope of levy of service tax under the category of “Supply of Tangible Goods Service” has also been clarified by the Board in their Circular No.334/1/2008-TRU dt

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s purchased by them. In fact during the same period, appellants had purchased three motor cars on which no cenvat credit was availed by them. There was no malafide intention on their part and hence imposed penalty under Section 78 is unjustified and it is prayed that the same may be set aside.
3.5 With respect to liability to pay service tax on TDS amount a demand of Rs. 27,37,927/- has been confirmed. In this regard, the adjudicating authority concerned has accepted their plea in adjudication that actual liability works out only to Rs. 2,71,106/- together with interest of Rs. 41,886/- which is already paid up by them. However, the adjudicating authority has imposed penalty of Rs. 2,71,106/- under Section 78 of the Act. It is contended that there was considerable confusion on the taxability in respect of inclusability of TDS amount in the value of taxable service. Appellant had not discharged tax liability of Rs. 2,71,106/- only on the bonafide belief that the TDS amount is not requir

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ere the adjudicating authority has found that the aircraft is not owned by the lessor that originally belongs to Boeing Capital Corporation (BCC) who as the head lessor has given operational control and possession of the aircraft under a separate lease agreement dt.5.5.2002 to European Air Transport (EAT) for further use. Hence the ownership and title of the aircraft vests with the said BCC and not with the foreign lessor who have now leased their aircraft to the appellants. Therefore, it cannot be said that foreign lessor has vested possession and control to the appellant. He also draws our attention to paras 14 & 15 of the same impugned order wherein the adjudicating authority has correctly found that exclusion of TDS amounts from taxable income and utilization of ineligible cenvat credit on motor vehicles had been suppressed from the department with intent to evade demand of service tax liability and penalty under applicable provisions were very much imposable on the appellant.
5.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

etc. without prior consent of BCC. At the same time, it is also provided that if the EAT seeks consent from BCC for such a provision, such consent should not unreasonably be withheld or delayed provided that such sublease shall be expressly made subject and subordinate to the lease between BCC and EAT. Further, BCC have also been permitted to “wet lease” the aircraft in the ordinary course of EAT‟s business. Obviously, EAT was fully permitted and well within their rights to further lease the aircrafts to the appellant. Operating Lease agreement between EAT and the appellant dt. 27.02.2006 is for the same Boeing Model 756-236 Aircraft Sl.No. 24102. In fact, the very same conditions that were agreed upon between BCC and EAT have been reiterated in Article 5 of the agreement between EAT and the appellant.
8.1 Taking into account these aspects and also the other terms of agreement brought to our attention by the Ld. Sr.Advocate, in particular, the operation of the aircraft with the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n our opinion, the controversy in these appeals is in a narrow compass, namely, whether the transaction entered into by the appellants with the hirers of DG sets would be in the nature of a transaction involving transfer of possession and control of goods to the users or is only one that allows the other users to use the goods without giving legal right of possession and effective control. If the transaction falls in the first category, that would be considered as deemed sale of goods and exigible to sales tax/VAT. However in case it is the latter, the transaction would then be treated as a service attracting levy of service tax under Finance Act, 1994.
6.2) Taxable service of supply of tangible goods serviceshas been defined under section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994 as any service provided or to be provided to any person, by any other person in relation to supply of tangible goods including machinery, equipment and appliances for use, without transferring right of possessi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

.3) After 1.7.2012, consequent to change in service tax law, all services exempted any activity carried out by any person for consideration including a declared service, was made liable to service tax levy except certain activities which were specifically exempted or excluded from taxation. One such exclusion from service tax levy as per Section 65(B)(44) is an activity which constitutes merely (i) a transfer of title in goods or immovable property by way of sale, gift or in any other manner or (ii) such transfer, delivery or supply of any goods which is deemed to be a sale within the meaning of clause (29A) of Article 366 of the constitution or (iii) a transfer in money or actionable claim. At this stage, it will be useful to refresh ourselves with the said clause 29(A) of Article 366 of the Constitution which reads as follows:
(29A) tax on the sale or purchase of goods includes
(a) a tax on the transfer, otherwise than in pursuance of a contact, of property in any goods for cash, d

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hose goods by the person making the transfer, delivery or supply and a purchase of those goods by the person to whom such transfer, delivery or supply is made;
6.4) Thus, both before and after 01-07-2012, it can be reasonably concluded that supply of tangible goods inter-alia with the right to use then for any purpose and which transaction is deemed as a sale will attract only sales tax levy. However, where such supply does not extend to transfer of possession and effective control of overall goods, such a transaction would not become a deemed sale but a service. This is exactly what CBEC had clarified in their circular No. 334/1/2012-TRU, dated 16.03.2012, in para 2.5.8 as follows:
2.5.8 What is the meaning of transfer of the right to use any goods?
Transfer of right to use goods is a well recognized constitutional and legal concept. Every transfer of goods on lease, license or hiring basis does not result in transfer of right to use goods. Transfer of right of goodsinvolves transf

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s or licenses required therefore should be available to the transferee;
– For the period during which the transferee has such legal right, it has to be the exclusion to the transferor this is the necessary concomitant of the plain language 91 of the statute, viz., a transfer of the right to use and not merely a license to use the goods;
– Having transferred, the owner cannot again transfer the same right to others. It was also advised that whether a transaction amounts to transfer of right or not cannot be determined with reference to a particular word or clause in the agreement. The agreement has to be read as a whole, to determine the nature of the transaction.
In para 6.6.2, CBEC gave examples of transactions to clarify whether such transactions involve transfer of right to use or otherwise. However, it was also advised therein that the list was only illustrative of how Courts have interpreted terms and conditions of various types of contracts, to see if a transaction involves tr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

irrespective of the fact the machine is operated or kept on stand-by for 30 days or less in a month.
ii) The agreements laid down that APVAT @ 14.5% on such charges would be charged extra and as per section 4 (8) of APVAT Act.
iii) Certain safety measures were laid down by appellant to be provided or taken care of by the hirer at the time of installation of DG set and at the site operation. These include provision of concrete level flooring, minimum of three independent earth pits, supply of change over switch, provision of fire extinguishers at site, damages caused by mishandling be borne by hirer, not permitting unauthorised persons to run DG sets etc.
iv) With regard to ownership, it was laid out in the agreement that DG set is a sole property of the appellant, that transaction is purely on hire basis; that DG set is hired out to the hirer for his own use only and subletting is not allowed; DG set has to be returned in good condition to the owner upon termination of the agreement

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t, the agreements clearly lay down that the lessee shall render/operate the DG set for his exclusive use and that lessor has transferred the right to use the DG set. It is also not in dispute that as long as goods are with the hirer, appellants do not have any legal right to use the goods themselves. It is also not in dispute that appellants have transferred the right only to one hirer at a time.
6.9) With this background, we are unable to fathom how the adjudicating authority has concluded that effective possession and control of the impugned DG sets remains with the appellants and not with the hirers. The authority has held that since hirer is not permitted to run the DG set in the absence of technician provided by the appellant, the hirer is not free to use the DG set and that this indicates control of the appellant over the DG set. He has also found fault with the condition that power should not be withdrawn more than 72% of 288 KV/ 500 Amps at 8 PF on standard load 40% – 60% etc.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

consumables like HSD, lubrication oil only that recommended by the manufacturer is to be used, this indicates restrictions on the use of lubricating oil. On the other hand, appellants have pointed out that this clause is only the requirement stipulated by the manufacturer and if wrong oil is used it can damage DG set; that further the very fact that all consumables like HSD/lubricant oil have to be supplied by the hirer itself indicates that the hirers would use the equipments as per their own needs only and hence they have full control on the usage of the DG sets. Adjudicating authority has pointed out few other aspects of the agreements which, according to him, also prove that hirer does not have effective control. However, we find that these are only standard clauses on any lease agreements where hire charges are fixed, payment of freight by hirer, subletting of DG set is barred etc.
6.10) The agreements therefore only set out the terms of the hire and in no way put any shackles o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rtment dated 31.03.2005 and G.O.Ms.No. 490, Revenue (CT-II), Dept. Dated 27.08.2005 and in G.O.Ms.No. 1615, Revenue (CT-II), Dept. Dated 31.08.2005 and the ruling is given as under:
VI. As per subsection (8) of Section 4 of APVAT Act, every VAT dealer who transfers the right to use goods taxable under the Act is liable to pay a tax for such goods at the rate specified in the schedules on the total amount realized or realizable on such transfer of right to use goods.
As seen from the agreement between the owner and the hirer clause (2) of Terms and conditions it is clearly mentioned that APGST @ 8% of the invoice amount will be charged extra as per Sec. 5E of APGST Act. VAT will be applicable w.e.f. 1.4.2005. Any other taxes or levies imposed by any of the State or Central authorities will be to the hirers account with retrospective effect.
Further in the preamble of the agreement, it is clearly mentioned that the Lesser (owner) is carrying on the business of leasing of power generat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

fer of both possession and control of the goods to the users of the goods. These transactions have been ruled as deemed sale of goods for the purpose of APVAT Act by the concerned Advance Ruling Authority. Appellants have also been discharging VAT on the hire charges under APVAT Act. Hence, this is the case of supply of tangible goods for use, with legal right of possession and effective control vesting with the hirer, required to be treated as deemed sale of goods, hence cannot be considered as supply of tangible goods for use of service for the purposes of Section 65(105) (zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994 for the period upto 01-07-2012 or as taxable service for the purpose of Section 65B (44) of the Finance Act, 1994 after 01-07-2012.
7) In arriving at these conclusions, we draw sustenance from the ratio of the following case laws of higher Appellate Forums:
i) In the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd [2006(2)STR 161 (SC), which has also been referred to by CBEC in the TAXATION OF SE

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s:
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 in goods, but it is the right to use property in goods; (ii) Article 366 (29-A)(d) read with the latter part of the clause (29-A) which uses the words, and such transfer, delivery or supply would show that the tax is not on the delivery of the goods used, but on the transfer of the right to use goods regardless of when or whether the goods are delivered for use subject to the condition that the goods should be in existence for use; (iii) in the transaction for the transfer of the right to use goods, delivery of goods is not a condition precedent, but the delivery of goods may be one of the elements of the transaction; (iv) the effective or general control does not mean always physical control and, even if the manner, method, modalities and the time of the use of goods is decided by the lessee or the customer, it

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

it cannot be said that there is no right to use by the lessee. Such a view of the revenue does not appear to be tenable when we read carefully the provisions of the agreement. Cl. 13 of the agreement provides for Hirers Covenants. As per Cl. 13.1, the hirer will use the equipment only for the purpose it is hired and shall not misuse or abuse the equipment. Similarly in Cl. 13.3, it is provided that the hirer will ensure the safe custody of the equipment by providing necessary security, parking bay, etc., and will be responsible for any loss or damage or destruction. Cl. 13.5 provides that the hirer shall be solely responsible and liable to handle any dispute entered with any third party in relation to the use and operation of the equipment. Further Cl. 14 dealing with title and ownership specifically provides that equipment is offered by GMMCO Ltd. only on rights to use basis. Cl. 15 relating to damages provides for compensation to be paid by the hirer to the assessee in case of damage

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y of giving various equipments on hire does not fall under the category of Supply of tangible goods for use, hence the same is not liable to service tax w.e.f. 16.05.2008. Now coming to the Revenues appeal, we find that the Ld. Commissioner dropped the demand for the period prior to 16.05.2008 mainly on the ground that the service is of Supply of tangible goods for use which came into effect on 16.05.2008, therefore prior to that date the service was not taxable. However, we, in our above findings, held that the service in question is not the service of Supply of tangible goods for use. In this position the main ground of the Ld. Commissioner for dropping of demand does not exist and not relevant. Though the Ld. Commissioner in a passing reference mentioned in the impugned order that the service prior to 16.05.2008 does not fall under the Business Auxiliary Service but not given the detailed findings. Therefore when the main ground for dropping of demand does not exist. The issue relat

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Paradise Steels Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE & CGST, Jaipur

M/s Paradise Steels Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE & CGST, Jaipur
Central Excise
2018 (9) TMI 1480 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
Excise Appeal No. 51414 of 2018 – A/52715/2018-EX[DB]
Central Excise
Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Shri C.L. Mahar, Member (Technical)
None (written submission) – for the appellant.
Ms Tamanna Alam, Authorized Representative (DR) – for the Respondent.
ORDER
Per. C.L. Mahar :-
The brief fact of the case are that the appellant are engaged in manufacture of S.S. Patta Patti falling under Chapter Heading 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant have been working under the special procedure for compound levy scheme for stainless steel Patta Patti prescribed vide Notification No. 17/2007-CE dated 01/03/2007 issued under Rule 15 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It is a matter of record that as per the conditions of the above-mentioned Notification No. 17/2007-CE dated 01/03/2007, th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

2007-CE does not have any provision with regard to reduction in the amount of the duty to be deposited even if a particular machine become inoperative during the period of any month. The assessee has gone in appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals) who has taken up all the three refund claims details given as below :-
SR. NO.
Appeal No.
OIO No. and date
Amount of refund involved (Rs.)
1.
APPL/JPR-I/CE/JD/509/X/ 2016
204/2016-R dated 04/07/2016
37,419/-
2.
APPL/JPR-I/CE/JD/634/XI/ 2016
267/2016-R dated 26/10/2016
18,064/-
3.
APPL/JPR-I/CE/JD/579/XI/ 2016
222/2016-R dated 12/09/2016
18,064/-
The learned Commissioner vide his order dated 09/01/2018 rejected the refund claim of the appellant on the ground that they have not opted for first time under compounded levy scheme as such they are required to pay full duty during the said month and they are not entitled for refund for the machine remaining inoperative for a part of month or days. It was concluded that the faci

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

machine remains inoperative. It has further been elaborated by the learned Advocate that they have given due intimation of machines remaining inoperative on 2nd May, 2016 and same was duly accepted and approved by the Range Superintendent. It cannot be the case of the Department that when the machine is not manufacturing any goods can be put for charging central excise duty.
3. We have also heard the learned AR who has reiterated the findings of the order-in-original of the Adjudicating Authority.
4. We have heard both sides and perused the record of the appeal.
5. It is a matter of record that the appellant have deposited duty of central excise under the compounded levy scheme in the S.S. Patta Patti manufacture in advance for the month of May 2016. After a few days one of the machine became inoperative and due information was given to the concerned Range Superintendent who has acknowledged and allowed that one machine out of the 9 machines declared by the appellant can remain inop

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

aj.) is reproduced here below :-
“23. It goes without saying that, if in any particular month, no machine is operated and no production had taken place, there cannot be any levy of excise Duty. The manufacture of goods is condition precedent for charging of excise duty without which no levy can be made. Therefore, the rule cannot be made to go beyond the scope of charging provision. On the undisputed premises that no production had taken place from the cold rolling machine which has been removed on 29th May, 1998. In other words, no production has been taken place in respect of cold rolling machine which ceased to operate before the first July, 1996, no review could have been allowed in respect of estimated production in that machine. This is the simple logic which prevailed within the Tribunal and in our opinion rightly. No contrary view can be taken from the reading of the Rules also. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the conclusion reached by the Tribunal was valid.
24. Moreo

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. National Oxygen Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Puducherry

M/s. National Oxygen Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Puducherry
Service Tax
2018 (9) TMI 1140 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
Appeal No. ST/40540/2018 – Final Order No. 41970/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Ms. Sindhuja, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Brief facts are that the appellants were issued show cause notice for short-payment of service tax and after due process of law, the original authority vide order dated 25.3.2015 confirmed the demand, interest and penalties. The appellant thereafter filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) on 12.10.2105 which was dismissed on the ground of tim

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

5.3.2015 was dispatched by registered post to the appellant on9.4.2015. The acknowledgment also shows that the appellant has received the same. However, the appellant has filed the appeal with much delay of more than six months only on 12.10.2015. That the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeal as being time-barred. He relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur – 2008 (221) ELT 163 (SC).
4. Heard both sides.
5. The grievance of the appellant is that the appeal has been dismissed on the ground of being time-barred. The Order-in- Original is dated 25.3.2015. As per the time prescribed under the statute, the appeal ought to have been fi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

en delivered to the assessee at Thiruvander Koil, Puducherry. It would take only a maximum of ten days. The O/o Assistant Commissioner as well as the address of the assessee is within Puducherry limits. Thus, it is seen that the contention of the appellant that they have not received the copy of the order and that they applied to the Assistant Commissioner on 28.9.2015 is not supported by any probable evidence. I am of the view the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation. The decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises (supra) settles the law that Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to condone delay beyond a period of one month. The impugned order does not call f

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai – I

M/s. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai – I
Central Excise
2018 (9) TMI 1118 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
Appeal No. E/42186/2017 – Final Order No. 41969/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Ms. Vishnu Priya, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Brief facts are that the appellants who are engaged in manufacture of excisable goods were availing the facility of CENVAT credit of service tax paid on various input services. On verification of records, it was noticed that they had availed wrongful credit on rent-a-cab services for the period April 2011 to May 20

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rts as well as the Tribunal, the said credit is eligible. She relied upon the Master Circular of the Board No.943/04/2011-CX dated 29.4.2011 and argued that the Board has clarified that if the provision of services is prior to 1.4.2011, then the credit which is availed after the said date is eligible. She adverted to the various invoices and pointed out that though the payments were received after 1.4.2011, the services were consumed by the appellant prior to 1.4.2011.
3. The ld. AR Shri B. Balamurugan supported the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that it is not clear from the records whether the services were consumed prior to 1.4.2011 and therefore the matter requires to be remanded for verification on this aspect.
4. Heard

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

1.4.2011, even though the payments are received after the said date, credit is eligible. The ld. counsel has also furnished copies of the invoices. On going through the same, I find that for the period for which the services have been consumed is shown as prior to 1.4.2011. However, this fact has to be verified for which, I deem it fit to remand the matter to the adjudicating authority, who shall consider the issue whether the services have been availed by the appellant prior to 1.4.2011 and also consider the applicability of the decision relied by the ld. counsel for appellant. Needless to say that the Board's circular is binding on the department.
6. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of rema

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. K. Bit Brave Sourcing Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai

M/s. K. Bit Brave Sourcing Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai
Service Tax
2018 (9) TMI 915 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
Appeal No. ST/41185/2017 – Final Order No. 41965/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
None for the Appellant
Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in providing services under the category of business auxiliary service, fashion design and also received various input services like manpower recruitment and supply agency service, management or business consultant service etc. for providing the output service. They filed refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

rejected the refund claim on the ground of limitation. The period of one year has to be computed from the date of receipt of FIRC and not the date of invoice in the case of export of goods. They have relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of mPortal India Wireless Solutions Pvt. Ltd. – 2012 (27) STR 134 (Kar.). In page 20 of the appeal memo, it is stated by them that if the period of one year is computed from the FIRC, the date of refund claim is well within the time. The FIRC used for computing export turnover are dated October 2012 to December 2012. Hence the last date of filing the refund claim would be before October 2013. The appellants have filed the refund claim on 30.9.2013 which is well within the p

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

one year for filing the refund claim. Further, the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bengaluru Vs. Span Infotech (India) Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2018 (12) GSTL 200 (Tri. LB) has also recently held that in the case of export of service, it is the date of receipt of FIRC which has to be taken as the relevant date and not the date of invoice.
7. From the above discussions as well as following the principle laid in the case of mPortal India Wireless Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Span Infotech (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra), I am of the view that the rejection of refund claim on the ground of limitation is unjustified. The impugned order is set aside a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Raj Ganesh Enterprises, M/s. Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Coimbatore

M/s. Raj Ganesh Enterprises, M/s. Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Coimbatore
Central Excise
2018 (9) TMI 902 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
Appeal No. E/42019 to 42021/2017 – Final Order Nos. 41966-41968/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
Shri G. Natarajan, Advocate for the Appellants
Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Brief facts are that M/s. Sri Ganapathi Marketing and M/s. Annapoorani Industries were engaged in manufacture and clearance of wet grinders in the name “Sowbaghya”. Based on intelligence that these units were not discharging central excise duty and are not eligible for SSI benefi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

j Ganesh Enterprises
Rs.5,00,000/-
Sri Ganapathi Marketing
E/42020/2017
Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
Rs.1,00,000/-
Annapoorani Industries
E/42021/2017
Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
Rs.5,00,000/-
Sri Ganapathi Marketing
3. He submitted that the brand name “Sowbaghya” belonged to M/s. Raj Ganesh Enterprises for a limited period upto March 2012 and thereafter it was assigned to Sowbaghya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. In fact, the other units like Sri Ganapathi Marketing and Annapoorani Industries were engaged to manufacture the wet grinders with “Sowbaghya” brand name but they were properly instructed to conduct the manufacturing activity in a rural area. In contrast to the instruction given by the appellant, the said units started the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Industries to manufacture wet grinders with the brand name. It is evident that they are guilty of violation of Central Excise Act and the rules made therein and therefore the penalties imposed are legal and proper.
5. Heard both sides.
6. On perusal of records and after hearing submissions made by both sides, it is brought out that the main appellants against whom duty of Rs. 48,87,933/- (Sri Ganapathi Marketing) and Rs. 9,81,294/- (Annapoorani Industries) have so far not filed any appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) as submitted by the ld. counsel for the appellant. The only allegation against the appellant is that they dealt with the goods on which duty was not discharged. Taking into consideration the facts of the situation, I am of t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Amendment In Rules 58, 138C & 142 and insertion of form GST ENR-02 in Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017

Amendment In Rules 58, 138C & 142 and insertion of form GST ENR-02 in Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
SRO 303 Dated:- 10-7-2018 Jammu and Kashmir SGST
GST – States
Jammu and Kashmir SGST
Jammu & Kashmir SGST
GOVERNMENT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION NO. SRO 303
(JAMMU & KASHMIR), DATED 10-7-2018
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 164 of the Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act No. V of 2017), the State Government, on the recommendations of the Council hereby make the following rules further to amend the Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, namely:-
(i) in rule 58, after sub-rule (1), the following sub-rule shall be inserted, name

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:-
"Provided that where the circumstances so warrant, the Commissioner, or any other officer authorised 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 129 or section 130" shall be inserted;
(iv) after FORM GST ENR-01, the following FORM shall be inserted, name

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. SELFSHINE POLYMERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Versus STATE OF KERLA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE STATE TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR, GST CELL AND FACILITATION CENTER, GST COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON, N

M/s. SELFSHINE POLYMERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Versus STATE OF KERLA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE STATE TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR, GST CELL AND FACILITATION CENTER, GST COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON, NEW DELHI, THE NODAL OFFICER FOR STATE GST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE COMMISSIONER, GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
GST
2018 (8) TMI 974 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 10-7-2018
W. P. (C). No. 21287 of 2018
GST
MR. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
For The Petitioner : SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN  SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM AND SRI.RAJA KANNAN
For The Respondent : SRI. V.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

dress the grievances of taxpayers due to technical glitches on GST Portal.” Paragraph 5 of the circular outlines the procedure the Nodal 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 e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t on earlier occasions permitted the petitioners to apply to the additional sixth respondent for the issue resolution.
5. So, in this case also, the petitioner may apply to the additional sixth respondent, the Nodal Officer. The petitioner applying, the Nodal Officer will look into the issue and facilitate the petitioner's uploading FORM GST TRAN-1, without reference to the time-frame. Ordered so.
6. I may also observe that if the petitioner applies within two weeks after receiving this judgment, the Nodal Officer will consider and take steps within a week thereafter. If the uploading of FORM GST TRAN-1 is not possible for reasons not attributable to the petitioner, the authority will also enable him to take credit of the input tax availa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Pilkhani Distillery & Chemical Works Versus Commr. of CGST, Meerut

Pilkhani Distillery & Chemical Works Versus Commr. of CGST, Meerut
Service Tax
2018 (8) TMI 811 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI
CESTAT ALLAHABAD – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
ST/70029 & 70030/2018-ST[SM] – A/71382-71383/2018-SM[BR]
Service Tax
MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
Shri Aalok Arora, Advocate for the Appellant (s)
Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, AC(A.R.) for the Revenue
ORDER
Per Mrs. Archana Wadhwa:
After hearing both sides I find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of alcoholic liquor and was doing the job work for M/s. United Spirit Ltd., Bangalore. The bottling of alcoholic liquor was conceived to be as a service provided by the appellant falling under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Service

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

are Fund as provided under section 11B of the Central Excise Act, instead of giving it to the appellant as the same would be hit by the bar of unjust enrichment.
3. On going through the said order of Commissioner(Appeals) I note that he has made a reference to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Madras v. Addition & Co. Ltd. [2016 (339) E.L.T. 177(S.C.)] laying down that the word 'buyer' in clause (e) to proviso to section 11B(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be restricted to the first buyer from the manufacturer. As such though he has appreciated the appellant's submission that the Service Tax was charged separately from M/s. United Spirits and by way of separate notes have been cre

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

um of collection of Service Tax from the ultimate buyer does not arise. For the above proposition ld. Advocate relies upon the Tribunal decision in the case of Tamralipta Co-Op. Spinning Mill Ltd. v. Commr. Of C.Ex., Calcutta-II [2003 (162) E.L.T. 840 (Tri.-Kolkata)]
Ld. Advocate also draws my attention to a certificate given by their principal M/s. United Spirit to the effect that the amount of Service Tax has not been collected by them from the customers and the goods have been sold at the price fixed by the authorities. However, he fairly agrees that the said certificate dated 09.12.2017 was not before the authorities below and as such does not stand considered by them. Inasmuch as the said certificate is an important document, I feel t

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Harpal Singh Kalsi Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & GST, Allahabad

M/s Harpal Singh Kalsi Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & GST, Allahabad
Service Tax
2018 (8) TMI 810 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI
CESTAT ALLAHABAD – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
COD Application No.ST/COD/70184/2018 In APPEAL No.ST/70426/2018-ST[SM] – A/71380/2018-SM[BR]
Service Tax
Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
Shri Kartikeya Narain, Adv for Appellant
Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, (Asstt. Commr.) AR, for Respondent
ORDER
Per: Archana Wadhwa
After condoning the de

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Trikoot Iron & Steel Casting Ltd. Versus Commr. of Central GST, Meerut-i

Trikoot Iron & Steel Casting Ltd. Versus Commr. of Central GST, Meerut-i
Central Excise
2018 (8) TMI 784 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI
CESTAT ALLAHABAD – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
E/70335/2018-EX[SM] – A/71381/2018-SM[BR]
Central Excise
MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
Shri Aalok Arora, Advocate for the Appellant (s)
Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, AC(A.R.) for the Revenue
ORDER
Per Mrs. Archana Wadhwa:
After hearing both sides, it is seen that duty of Rs. 21,28,500/-(Rupees Twenty One Lakh Twenty Eight Thousand & Five Hundred only) stands confirmed against the appellant, who are engaged in the manufacture of MS bars, on the allegations and findings of clandestine activities.
2. Out of the said demand, duty of Rs. 20

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ther activities of the assessee and ER-1 figures are the correct figures, the lower authorities have not accepted the said stand and based upon the difference in figures confirmed the demand.
3. I find that apart from the said difference, there is virtually no other evidence on record to show any clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods. Even if the assessee's explanation is not accepted it has to be appreciated that both the figures stand given in the two returns by the appellants themselves. The charges of clandestine removal are required to be produced by the Revenue and onus is heavily placed upon them. No efforts stand made by the Revenue to further investigate the matter and collect evidence of any clandestine activities. Ina

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central GST, Noida

M/s. Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central GST, Noida
Central Excise
2018 (8) TMI 783 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI
CESTAT ALLAHABAD – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
E/70256/2018-EX[SM] – A/71369/2018-SM[BR]
Central Excise
MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
Shri Prateek Dawar (Proxy Counsel) for the Appellant (s)
Shri Pawan Kumar Singh (Supdt.) (A.R.) for the Revenue
ORDER
Per Mrs. Archana Wadhwa:
As per facts on record, the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of sugar and molasses and were availing the benefit of Cenvat credit of duty paid on input, capital goods and input services. It is seen that inasmuch as the appellant was selling the electricity generated in their plant to UPPL, Revenue e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

015 (322) ELT 769 (SC) was followed by the Commissioner in the assessee's own case and vide Order-in-Original dated 17.11.2016, the demand raised against the assessee on the said ground was dropped.
3. As a consequence of dropping of demand, the appellant filed a refund claim on 01.12.2016, to the extent of Rs. 30,02,178/-. While adjudicating the said refund claim, the original adjudicating authority allowed the same to the extent of Rs. 26,23,605/- and rejected the amount of refund of amounting to Rs. 3,78,573/- on the ground that the same pertains to the period 2007-08 and 2008-09 and inasmuch as the said period was not covered by the order dated 17.11.2016 of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Hapur, the same is not refundable to the a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

sessee and rejected the claim as barred by limitation. Hence the present appeal.
5. The ld.Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the amount was being paid by the appellant in terms of Rule 6(3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on the sale of electricity and bagasse by filing a protest letter dated 05.06.2009. The appellant was reversing proportionate credit on the inputs after an objection raised by the audit and after filing of the protest letter in question. It is their contention that inasmuch as the issue now stands decided in their favour, on merits, the said refund has to be granted to them.
6. After carefully considering the submissions made by both the sides I find that every refund application has to pass throug

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Designation of the officers for the purposes of Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (Tamil Nadu Act 19 of 2017).

Designation of the officers for the purposes of Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (Tamil Nadu Act 19 of 2017).
G.O. Ms. No. 79 Dated:- 10-7-2018 Tamil Nadu SGST
GST – States
Tamil Nadu SGST
Tamil Nadu SGST
NOTIFICATIONS BY GOVERNMENT
COMMERCIAL TAXES AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT
[G.O. Ms. No. 79, Commercial Taxes and Registration (B1), 10th July 2018,
Aani 26, Vilambi, Thiruvalluvar Aandu-2049.]
No.II(2)/CTR/591(e)/2018.
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Tamil Nadu Act 19 of 2017) and in supersession of the Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Notification No.II(2)/CTR/562(b)/2017, published in Part II-Section 2 of the Tamil Nadu Governmen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Jai Baba Amarnath Industries Versus State of U.P. And 3 Others

M/s Jai Baba Amarnath Industries Versus State of U.P. And 3 Others
GST
2018 (7) TMI 1329 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (15) G. S. T. L. 484 (All.)
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 10-7-2018
Writ Tax No. 942 of 2018
GST
Hon'ble Ashok Kumar, J.
For the Petitioner : Rahul Agarwal
For the Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel representing all the respondents.
Learned Standing Counsel has rightly pointed out that the constitution of the appellate Tribunal is to be done by the GST council. For that purposes the necessary instructions are required from the Union.
In view of the said submission, learned counsel for the peti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

was shown to the tune of Rs. 6,02,352/- and the IGST (Integrated Goods and Service Tax) has been charged @ 18% to the tune of Rs. 1,08,423.36/-. After the issuance of the tax invoice the goods are handed over to the transporter namely Hindustan Transport Company for transportation from Mandi Gobindgarh Sahib, Punjab to Jhansi, U.P.
On 17.05.2018 at 11.50 pm the goods are intercepted by the respondent no. 4 and a detention memo has been issued in which it has been mentioned that the goods though were accompanying the documents but it was not accompanying the E-way bill.
On the basis of the aforesaid discrepancy the seizure proceedings are carried out and a penalty order under Section129 (3) dated 22.05.2018 was passed.
Against the order

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

date no appellate Tribunal is constituted by the respondent State.
Learned Standing Counsel has contended that it is only the union to constitute the appellate Tribunal and not alone the State of U.P.
This Court finds that in any case the constitution of the Tribunal is necessary and in this regard earlier also this Court has issued the directions for the constitution of the Tribunal.
Surprisingly even after completion of one year from the date of introduction of the GST no appellate Tribunal has been constituted.
Let the Principal Secretary (Tax and Institutional Registration) Civil Secretariat, Lucknow may file his personal affidavit by providing all details with regard to non establishment of the Tribunal till date and the steps take

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Richfeel Health and Beauty Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of HP and others

M/s Richfeel Health and Beauty Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of HP and others
GST
2018 (7) TMI 1098 – HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT – TMI
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 10-7-2018
CWP No. 2505 of 2017
GST
MR. SANJAY KAROL, AND MR. AJAY MOHAN GOEL, JJ.
For the petitioner: Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Charu Bhatnagar, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. Ranjan, Sharma, Mr. Adarsh Sharma and Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Additional Advocate Generals, for respondents/State.
Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India, for respondent/Union of India. Mr. Rajiv Jiwan, Advocate, for respondents No.3 and 4.
Sanjay Karol Acting Chief Justice. (Oral)
Reply/affidavit o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

IPP has only once allocated limited funds to the department for disbursal that too in the last week of March 2018 and accordingly amount has been disbursed against only a few of the refund applications filed with the department. Due to non-allocation of sufficient funds by the DIPP to the department, applications for budgetary support refunds including application filed by the petitioner are pending with department. Now DIPP has released additional funds for disbursal of budgetary support refunds which is under process of allocation to various divisions.
Accordingly, application filed by the petitioner pending with the department, shall be taken up for sanction and disbursal in terms of interim order dated 6.11.2017 of Hon'ble High Court s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

propriate statutory remedy.
5. Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, learned Senior Advocate has no objection the said proposition, subject to the appropriate authority deciding the matter, in the light of the averments made in para 8 of the reply/affidavit, reproduced supra.
6. Under these circumstances, as mutually agreed, present petition is disposed in the following terms.
(a) For the reason that the impugned order dated 26.9.2017, (Annexure P15), passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division Baddi, Distrit Solan, HP (respondent No.3), is passed without adhering to the principles of natural justice, is quashed and set aside.
(b) The appropriate authority shall pass fresh order, after affording opportunity of hearing to all concerne

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Trimurti Fragrances Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise, Kanpur

M/s Trimurti Fragrances Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise, Kanpur
Central Excise
2018 (7) TMI 995 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI
CESTAT ALLAHABAD – AT
Dated:- 10-7-2018
APPEAL Nos. E/70520 & 70572/2018-EX[SM] – Final Order Nos. 71388-71389 / 2018
Central Excise
Hon'ble Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member ( Judicial )
None for Appellant
Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh ( Dy. Commr. ) AR for Respondent
ORDER
Per: Archana Wadhwa
As nobody appeared for the appellant in spite of sufficient advance notices having been sent to the appellant, I have heard learned AR appearing for the Revenue and have gone through the impugned orders. As both the appeals are arising out of the same impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals), I proceed to dispose of both the appeals by common order.
2. As per facts on record appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Pan Masala and Chewing Tobacco and were discharging their duty liability in terms of Section 3A of C

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

heir appeal by holding that no interest liability would arise.
4. Based upon the said decision of the Tribunal in respect of the appellant's Delhi Unit they filed refund claim of interest amount of Rs. 4,08,718/- in one appeal and of Rs. 2,99,027/- in second appeal for the period as referred above. On 23.09.2016, the said refund claims stand rejected by the Original Adjudicating Authority as also by Appellate Authority on the point of time bar.
5. The assessee's contention is that inasmuch as the law was declared by the Tribunal vide the above referred two decisions in May, 2015 and November, 2015, in respect of their Delhi Unit, the refund claims filed by them immediately thereafter has to be held as falling within the limitation period. They have also submitted that inasmuch there was no requirement of payment of interest, the Revenue cannot be allowed to retain the said illegal levy, without any authority of law and should have refunded the same to the assessee, without raising th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e Central Excise Act. Admittedly in the present case, the refund claims filed by the appellant is beyond the normal period of limitation of one year.
7. The issue is as to whether the same would be hit by the bar of limitation or the same had to be allowed in the light of the Tribunal decisions in the appellant's Delhi Unit case. As already observed the present appellant did not keep the matter alive by filing any appeal against the confirmation of interest or deposit of the same. All the refunds, have to be claimed in terms of Section 11 B of the Act, which prescribed a period within which such claims should have been filed by an assessee, subject to some exceptions. Admittedly in the present matter, the appellant's case is not covered by such exceptions like payment of duty under protest or the assessments being provisionally. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Porcelain Electrical Mfg. reported at 1998 (98) ELT 583 (S.C.) has held that the authorities working under the Act ar

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Draft proposals for amending GST Laws for comments of the stakeholders till 15.07.2018

Draft proposals for amending GST Laws for comments of the stakeholders till 15.07.2018
GST
Dated:- 9-7-2018

Sl. No.
Section/Sub-section/Clause
Amendments as shown in Red and Strikethrough
Rationale/Remarks
CGST Act, 2017
Definitions
1.
2 (4)
2 (4) “adjudicating authority” means any authority, appointed or authorised to pass any order or decision under this Act, but does not include the Central Board of Excise Indirect Taxes and Customs, the Revisional Authority, the Authority for Advance Ruling, the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, the Appellate Authority, and the Appellate Tribunal and the Authority referred to in sub-section (2) of section 171;
This is in pursuance of the change in name of the Central Board of Excise and Customs to the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs constituted under the Central Boards of Revenue Act, 1963 (54 of 1963).
Further, the National AntiProfiteering Authority constituted by the Central Government under section 1

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

this article, the President is empowered to establish a separate Board to ensure equitable distribution of funds in the State's budget to meet the developmental needs of the region. It is being added now based on the request received from the State of Karnataka.
5.
2 (102)
(102) “services” means anything other than goods, money and securities but includes activities relating to the use of money or its conversion by cash or by any other mode, from one form, currency or denomination, to another form, currency or denomination for which a separate consideration is charged;
Explanation-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the expression “services” includes facilitating or arranging transactions in securities.
Although 'securities' has been excluded from the definition of 'goods' and 'services' in the CGST Act, facilitating or arranging transactions in securities is liable to GST. This has been clarified recently through a detailed FAQ on Banking and Insurance wherein

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

es or transactions, when constituting a supply in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1), shall be treated either as supply of goods or supply of services as referred to in Schedule II.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),
(a) activities or transactions specified in Schedule III; or
(b) such activities or transactions undertaken by the Central Government, a State Government or any local authority in which they are engaged as public authorities, as may be notified by the Government on the recommendations of the Council,
shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services.
(3) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (1), (1A) and (2), the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, specify, by notification, the transactions that are to be treated as-
(a) a supply of goods and not as a supply of services; or
(b) a supply of services and not as a supply of goods.
Classification of certain specified activities or

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tivities is taxed when received from a related person or from any of their establishments outside India.
8.
Schedule III, new insertion
7. Supply of goods from a place in the non-taxable territory to another place in the non-taxable territory without such goods entering into the taxable territory
It is sought to exclude from the tax net such transactions which involve movement of goods, caused by a registered person, from one non-taxable territory to another non-taxable territory
9.
Schedule III, new insertion
8 (a) Supply of warehoused goods to any person before clearance for home consumption.
(b) Supply of goods by the consignee to any other person, by endorsement of documents of title to the goods, after the goods have been dispatched from the port of origin located outside India but before clearance for home consumption.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this clause, the expression “warehoused goods” shall have the meaning as assigned to it in the Customs Act, 1962

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

such person on reverse charge basis as the recipient and all the provisions of this Act shall apply to such recipient as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both.
9 (4) The Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, specify a class of registered persons who shall, in respect of taxable goods or services or both received from an unregistered supplier, pay the tax on reverse charge basis as the recipient of such goods or services or both, and all the provisions of this Act shall apply to such recipient as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both
Section 9 (4), which mandates that all registered persons shall pay the tax on reverse charge basis on purchases made from unregistered persons, is presently under suspension. This sub-section is being omitted for trade facilitation.
Instead, it is proposed to take an enabling power for

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y in case of other suppliers,
subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed:
Provided that the Government may, by notification, increase the said limit of fifty lakh rupees to such higher amount, not exceeding one hundred and fifty lakh crore rupees, as may be recommended by the Council.
Provided further that a person who opts to pay tax under clause (a), clause (b) or clause (c) may supply services of value not exceeding ten percent of turnover in the preceding financial year in a State or Union territory or five lakh rupees, whichever is higher.
(2) The registered person shall be eligible to opt under sub-section (1), if-
(a) he is not engaged in the supply of services, other than supplies referred to in clause (b) of paragraph (6) of Schedule II save as provided in sub-section (1);
(b) he is not engaged in making any supply of goods which are not leviable to tax under this Act;
(c) he is not engaged in making any inter-State outward supplies of goods;
(d)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

by the GST Council.
At present, registered persons engaged in the supply of services (other than restaurant services) are not eligible for composition scheme. As a result, manufacturers and traders supplying services are unable to opt for the scheme even if its percentage is very small as compared to the supplies of goods. With a view to enable these taxpayers to avail of the benefit of composition scheme, a new proviso is being added in order to allow them to be eligible for the scheme even if they supply services of value not exceeding 10% of the turnover in the preceding financial year in a State/Union territory or ₹ 5 lakhs, whichever is higher.
This is a taxpayer-friendly measure and it is believed that small taxpayers would immensely benefit from this amendment.
This is a consequential amendment, as a new proviso is being added to section 10 (1) which allows the registered person to opt for the scheme even if they supply services of value not exceeding 10% of the turno

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

f section 31 or the date of receipt of payment, whichever is earlier;
The amendment seeks to correct a drafting error as the provisions for issuance of invoices/other documents are also contained in other sub-sections of section 31.
Input Tax Credit
14.
16 (2) (b)
16 (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, no registered person shall be entitled to the credit of any input tax in respect of any supply of goods or services or both to him unless,
(a) he is in possession of a tax invoice or debit note issued by a supplier registered under this Act, or such other tax paying documents as may be prescribed;
(b) he has received the goods or services or both.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this clause, it shall be deemed that the registered person has received the goods or, as the case may be, services,-
(i) where the goods are delivered by the supplier to a recipient or any other person on the direction of such registered person, whether acting as an agent or otherwi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Subject to the provisions of section 41, the tax charged in respect of such supply has been actually paid to the Government, either in cash or through utilisation of input tax credit admissible in respect of the said supply; and
(d) he has furnished the return under section 39:
Provided that :
Provided further that where a recipient fails to pay to the supplier of goods or services or both, other than the supplies on which tax is payable on reverse charge basis, the amount towards the value of supply along with tax payable thereon within a period of one hundred and eighty days from the date of issue of invoice by the supplier, an amount equal to the input tax credit availed by the recipient shall be added to his output tax liability, along with interest thereon, in such manner as may be prescribed:
It is proposed to remove the liability to pay interest in case where the recipient has been made liable to pay an amount equal to the ITC availed in case he fails to pay to the supplie

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

n sale of land and, subject to clause (b) of paragraph 5 of Schedule II, sale of building) by excluding it from the ambit of 'exempt supply' on which ITC is blocked.
The proposed amendment is a taxpayer friendly measure.
17.
17 (5) (a), new (aa) & (b)
17(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 for transportation of persons having approved seating capacity of not more than thirteen persons (including the driver), vessels and aircraft and other conveyances except when they are used
(i) for making the following taxable supplies, namely:-
(A) further supply of such vehicles or ; vessels or aircraft conveyances; or
(B) transportation of passengers; or
(C) imparting training on driving, flying, navigating such vehicles, vessels or aircraft or conveyances;
(ii) for transportation of goods;
and
(iii) for transportatio

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ment 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
(iii) travel benefits extended to employees on vacation such as leave or home travel concession:
Provided that the input tax credit in respect of such goods or services or both shall be available, where the provision of such goods or services or both is obligatory for an employer to provide to its employees under any law for the time being in force.
It is proposed to expand the scope of ITC availability in case of motor vehicles having approved capacity of not more than 13 persons (including the driver) in case it is used for specified purposes.
The amendment is sought to make it clear that input tax

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nce with the provisions of section 17(5)(b), ITC is not available in respect of food and beverages, health services, travel benefits to employees etc. This sub-section is being amended to allow ITC in respect of such goods or services or both where the provision of such goods or services or both is obligatory for an employer to provide to its employees under any law for the time being in force.
This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment.
18.
20, Explanation (c)
Clause (c) of Explanation to section 20:
(c) the term ''turnover'', in relation to any registered person engaged in the supply of taxable goods as well as goods not taxable under this Act, means the value of turnover, reduced by the amount of any duty or tax levied under entry entries 84 and 92A of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and entries 51 and 54 of List II of the said Schedule.
It is proposed to exclude the amount of tax levied under entry 92A of List I from the value of turnover for the purposes of di

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

to correct this inadvertent omission.
Registration
19.
22 Explanation
Explanation (iii) to section 22 the expression “special category States” shall mean the States as specified in sub-clause (g) of clause (4) of article 279A of the Constitution except the State of Jammu and Kashmir and Assam.
The State of Assam has requested that the threshold exemption for registration in their State should be raised from ₹ 10 lakhs to ₹ 20 lakhs
20.
24 (x)
24 (x) every electronic commerce operator who is required to collect tax at source under section 52;
An e-commerce operator is presently required to take compulsory registration in terms of section 24(x) even if his aggregate turnover in a financial year does not exceed ₹ 20 lakhs. Clause (x) of section 24 is being amended to provide that only those e-commerce operators who are required to collect tax at source under section 52 would be required to take compulsory registration. Other e-commerce operators who are not requ

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

cribed:
Provided also that a person having a unit, as defined in the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 (28 of 2005), in a Special Economic Zone or being a Special Economic Zone Developer shall be granted a separate registration as distinct from his units located outside the Special Economic Zone in the same State or Union territory:
Provided also that a person having more than one unit, as defined in the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 (28 of 2005), in a Special Economic Zone shall be granted a separate registration for each such unit, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed.
It is proposed to allow persons having multiple places of business in a State or Union territory to obtain separate registrations for each such place of business.
As per the extant provisions, a person seeking registration under the Act shall be granted a single registration in a State or Union territory. However, if he has multiple business verticals in a State or Union territory, he may obtain sepa

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

is legal heirs, in case of death of such person, cancel the registration, in such manner and within such period as may be prescribed, having regard to the circumstances where,
(a)..
(b)..
(c) the taxable person, other than the person registered under subsection (3) of section 25, is no longer liable to be registered under section 22 or section 24.
Provided that pending cancellation
of registration, the proper officer
may suspend the registration of
the person subject to such
conditions and limitations as may
be prescribed.
It is proposed to provide that once a registered person has applied for cancellation of registration, the proper officer may temporarily suspend its registration till the procedural formalities for cancellation are completed.
This measure would relieve the taxpayer of continued compliance burden under the law till such time as the process of allowing cancellation of registration is completed.
23.
29 (2), new proviso
Provided that the proper offic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

istered person, who has supplied such goods or services or both, may issue to the recipient a one or more credit notes for supplies made in a financial year containing such particulars as may be prescribed.
(2)..
(3) ..Where a tax invoice has one or
more tax invoices have been issued for supply of any goods or services or both and the taxable value or tax charged in that tax invoice the said tax invoices is found to be less than the taxable value or tax payable in respect of such supply, the registered person, who has supplied such goods or services or both, shall issue to the recipient a one or more debit notes for supplies made in a financial year containing such particulars as may be prescribed.
At present, a credit/debit note which is issued by the registered person is required to be issued invoice-wise. This causes avoidable compliance burden for tax payers. Thus, it is proposed to allow issuance of consolidated credit/debit which is in line with the best international practi

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, every registered person whose turnover during a financial year exceeds the prescribed limit (presently, ₹ 2 crore) shall get his accounts audited by a chartered accountant or a cost accountant and shall submit a copy of the audited annual accounts, the reconciliation statement under sub-section (2) of section 44 and other prescribed documents.
In this regard, Ministry of Defence has represented that the annual accounts of Canteen Stores Department (CSD) are internally audited by the Controller of Defence Accounts (CDA) and therefore, should not be subject to audit by a Chartered Accountant or a Cost Accountant.
Thus, it is proposed to provide that any department of the Central or State Government / local authority which is subject to audit by CAG need not get their books of account audited by any Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant.
Returns
26.
39(9)
Subject to the provisions of sections 37 and 38, if any registered person after furnishing a return under sub-section

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ers to correct inadvertent mistakes in the returns by filing an amendment return.
27.
43A new insertion
43A. Procedure for furnishing return and availing input tax credit. – (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 37 or section 38, the procedure for furnishing the details of outward supplies by a registered person, other than an Input Service Distributor or a non-resident taxable person or a person paying tax under the provisions of section 10 or section 51 or section 52 (hereafter in this section referred to as the 'supplier'), and for verifying, validating, modifying or deleting such supplies by the corresponding registered person (hereafter in this section referred to as the 'recipient') in connection with the furnishing of return under section 39 shall be such as may be prescribed..
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 41, section 42 orsection 43, the procedure for availing of input tax credit by the recipient andverification thereof shall be such as m

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t tax has not been paid by the said supplier;
(v) for the purposes of clause (ii) and (iii), the supplier and the recipient shall be jointly and severally liable to pay tax or to reverse the input tax credit availed against such tax, as the case may be;
(vi) the procedure and threshold for availing input tax credit by the recipient on the basis of invoice for which details have not been furnished by the supplier under clause (i) and recovery thereof; and
(vii) the procedure, safeguards and threshold of tax amounts in the invoices, the details of which can be furnished under clause (i) by a newly registered person or by a registered person who has defaulted in payment of tax liability, exceeding the amount of tax or the period of time specified in the rules.
A new section is being introduced in order to enable the new return filing procedure as proposed by the Returns Committee and approved by GST Council.
GST Practitioner
28.
48
48 (2) A registered person may authorise an appr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

, in that order;
(b) the central tax shall first be utilised towards payment of central tax and the amount remaining, if any, may be utilised towards the payment of integrated tax;
(c) the State tax shall first be utilized towards payment of State tax and the amount remaining, if any, may be utilized towards payment of integrated tax only when the balance of the input tax credit on account of central tax is not available for payment of integrated tax;
(d) the Union territory tax shall first be utilized towards payment of Union territory tax and the amount remaining, if any, may be utilized towards payment of integrated tax only when the balance of the input tax credit on account of central tax is not available for payment of integrated tax;
(e) the central tax shall not be utilised towards payment of State tax or Union territory tax;
(f) the State tax or Union territory tax shall not be utilized towards payment of central tax:
Provided that input tax credit on account of central

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

x credit of State tax/Union territory tax towards payment of integrated tax.
It is sought to insert a new proviso to sub-section (5) in order to specify that a taxpayer would be able to utilise credit on account of CGST, SGST/UTGST, only after exhausting all the credit on account of IGST available to him.
This is being done to minimise fund settlement on account of IGST.
30.
New sub-section 5A in section 49
Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, prescribe the order of utilization of input tax credit of integrated tax, central tax, State tax or Union territory tax, as the case may be, towards payment of any such tax.
It is proposed to take an enabling power for the Government to prescribe any specific order of utilization of input tax credit of any of the taxes viz., integrated tax, central tax, State tax or Union territory tax for the payment of the said taxes.
Refunds
31.
54, Explanation (2) (e)
Expla

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nd of tax paid on zero rated supplies export of goods or services or both or on inputs or input services used in making such zero-rated supplies exports;
Section 54 (8) provides a list of situations where the principle of unjust enrichment does not apply for the purposes of payment of refund. One such situation is zero-rated supplies of goods or services.
Zero-rated supply under section 16 (1) of the IGST Act includes physical exports of goods or services and supplies made to an SEZ unit/SEZ developer and the principle of unjust enrichment does not apply in such cases. Presently, under section 16 (3) of the IGST Act, only the supplier making supplies of goods or services to an SEZ unit/SEZ developer can claim refund. It is proposed to allow ITC to the SEZ developer or SEZ unit and the supplier in DTA may recover the tax amount from such SEZ unit, etc.
Thus, it is proposed to amend section 54(8)(a) in order to provide that the principle of unjust enrichment will apply in case of ref

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

gulations.
In this respect, the provisions of section 2(6)(iv) of the IGST Act are also being amended to provide that services shall qualify as exports even if the payment for the services supplied is received in Indian rupees as per RBI regulations.
Recovery of Tax
34.
79 (1)
In this section, two Explanations are proposed to be inserted as under:
Explanation .-
(1) For the purposes of this section, the word person shall include “distinct persons” as referred to in sub-section (4) or, as the case may be, sub-section (5) of section 25.
(2) For the purposes of this clause, the term “Collector” means the Collector of a revenue district and includes a Deputy Commissioner or a district magistrate or head of the revenue administration in a revenue district.
It is proposed to provide that recovery may be made from distinct persons present in different States / UTs in order to ensure speedy recovery from other establishments of the registered person.
It is proposed to clarify the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of rupees.
36.
112 (8)
No appeal shall be filed under sub-section (1), unless the appellant has paid
(a) in full, such part of the amount of tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty arising from the impugned order, as is admitted by him; and
(b) a sum equal to twenty per cent. of the remaining amount of tax in dispute, in addition to the amount paid under sub-section (6) of section 107, arising from the said order, subject to a maximum of fifty crore rupees, in relation to which the appeal has been filed.
In terms of section 112 (8), the appellant is required to pay a sum equal to 20% of the tax in dispute, in addition to the amount paid under section 107 (6), arising from the order of the Appellate Authority for filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.
This section is being amended to provide a ceiling of ₹ 50 crores for filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.
This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment especially in cases where the tax demand is of hundreds of cro

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he Additional Duties of Excise (Textile and Textile Articles) Act, 1978;”
(v)… ”
Explanation 3.-For removal of doubts, it is clarified that the expression “eligible duties and taxes” excludes any cess which has not been specified in Explanation 1 or Explanation 2 above and any cess which is collected as additional duty of customs under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
It is proposed to clarify that only transitional credit of eligible duties can be carried forward in the return and not all credits. This provision is already contained in rule 117(1) of the CGST Rules.
The eligible duties do not include the additional duty of excise leviable under section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Textile and Textile Articles) Act, 1978.
For removal of doubts, it is proposed to clarify that the expression “eligible duties and taxes” excludes any cess which has not been specified in Explanation 1 or Explanation 2 above and any cess which is collected as

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

India, or with or without payment of tax for export, as the case may be:
Provided that the period of one year or three years, as the case may be, may, on sufficient cause being shown, be extended by the Commissioner for a further period not exceeding one year and two years respectively.
In terms of section 143 of the CGST Act, a registered person (Principal) is allowed to send inputs or capital goods to a job worker for job work without payment of tax subject to the conditions inter-alia, that the inputs and capital goods are brought back within a period of one year and three years respectively.
It is proposed to insert a proviso in section 143 to provide that the period of one year or three years may, on sufficient cause being shown, be extended by the Commissioner for a further period not exceeding one year and two years respectively.
This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment to cover situations where the period of one year specified is not adequate in respect of job works such as h

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

tions.
This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment.
40.
2 (16), Explanation
'governmental authority' means “an authority or a board or any other body, –
(i) set up by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature; or
(ii) established by any Government,
with ninety per cent. or more participation by way of equity or control, to carry out any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G or to a municipality under article 243W of the Constitution”.
The reference to Panchayat under article 243G is sought to be added in the definition of Governmental authority which was left out inadvertently.
41.
12 (8)
12 (8) The place of supply of services by way of transportation of goods, including by mail or courier to,
(a) a registered person, shall be the location of such person;
(b) a person other than a registered person, shall be the location at which such goods are handed over for their transportation.
Provided that if the transportation of goods is to a place outside India, th

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

of supply of services:
Provided further that nothing contained in this clause shall apply in the case of services supplied in respect of goods which are temporarily imported into India for repairs or for any other treatment or process and are exported after repairs or such treatment or process without being put to any other use in India, than that which is required for such repairs or such treatment or process;
It is proposed to not tax job work of any treatment or process done on goods temporarily imported into India (e.g., gold, diamonds) which are then exported. This is a taxpayer-friendly amendment which would encourage skill development in our country.
43.
17 (1), new proviso
17 (1):
Provided that fifty per cent. of such amount as may be decided on the recommendation of the Council, which does not get apportioned under clauses (a) to (f) for the time being, shall be apportioned to the Central Government on ad hoc basis and shall be adjusted against amounts apportioned unde

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Job Work Under GST Includes Processing Goods Into New Products, Subject to Tax Regulations.

Job Work Under GST Includes Processing Goods Into New Products, Subject to Tax Regulations.
Case-Laws
GST
Levy of GST – job-work – Whether the processing of goods belonging to another person

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST on Uncertain Revenue

GST on Uncertain Revenue
Query (Issue) Started By: – CAPurnima Bothra Dated:- 9-7-2018 Last Reply Date:- 10-7-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 6 Replies
GST
Case Study:
Lessor has raised demand note asking lease rental for the whole year.However lessee has moved to court and is not ready to pay any dues.Now in this scenario Lessor is paying GST out of his pocket as no amount is recoverable from the lessee which leading to huge cash blockage at this moment.
Can GST amount be escaped/defered on uncertain revenue and be paid once the revenue becomes certain.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
You can decide according to the definition of 'Time of supply' as per details given below:-
13. Time of supply of se

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nt, in a case where the provisions of clause (a) or clause (b) do not apply :
Provided that where the supplier of taxable service 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 relating to such excess amount.
If you have issued invoice, liability arises in the following month. If no invoice is issued, then the time of supply is the date of receipt of payment.
Reply By Alkesh Jani:
The Reply:
Sir/Madam,
Please consult your Advocate seeking the interim order from the court to get gst amount from the party, till the final order. Also check Section 92 is appli

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Amendment of invoice.

Amendment of invoice.
Query (Issue) Started By: – Zaid Ansari Dated:- 9-7-2018 Last Reply Date:- 10-7-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Hello Sir,
I want to ask that how can i change invoice number after submitting GSTR-1.I have entered wrong invoice number in my previous month return now how can i amend it.Please Reply.
Reply By YAGAY and SUN:
The Reply:
you may make necessary changes in next month's return in statement 2A.
Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJ

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =