Goods and Services Tax

ITC against invoices paid after 180 days as per agreed terms
Query (Issue) Started By: – MohanLal tiwari Dated:- 3-4-2018 Last Reply Date:- 7-4-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 4 Replies
GST
Dear Experts,
As per section 16 of CGST act. – 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:

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Procedures and Intricacies of E-Way Bill – How, When and Who to generate
By: – Bimal jain
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 3-4-2018

Dear Professional Colleague,
E-way bill provision of GST, first introduced on 1 February 2018 was initially made mandatory for inter-state transportation of goods, having consignment value of more than ₹ 50,000 through road, railways, airways and vessels. However, after the e-way bill portal crashed on the very first day due to technical glitches, the government extended the deadline and asked GSTN to develop a fool-proof system before the re-launch of the bill.
Thereafter, the Central Government has substituted Rule 138 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (“CGST Rules”) vide Notification No. 12/2018- Central Tax, dated March 7, 2018 and notified April 01, 2018 as the date from which E-way bill Rules shall come into force for all inter-state movement of goods, having consignment value more than ₹ 50,000 vide

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Registered Taxpayer as the Consignor or the Consignee and then enter the Captcha Code, then Click on “Go” tab, then, Click on Send OTP and verify the same, after checking the auto-filled details.
* Enter the OTP received on the registered mobile number and verify the same by clicking on the “verify OTP' button”.
* Create a “New User id and password” by your own choice. The system validates and pops up a message if there is an error in the details entered by you. Once all the details are correctly filled, User ID and password will be created.
*Note: Tips for creating Username & Password:
The username should be of at least 8 characters with a combination of alphabets (A-Z/a-z), numerals (0-9) and special characters (@, #, $, %, &, *, ^) and can't exceed more than 15 characters.
The password should be of at least 8 characters.
When to generate E-way bill:
Every registered person either consignor or consignee, who is causing the movement of goods of consignment value exceeding

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

invoice is issued in respect of both exempted and taxable supply of goods.
Compulsory generation of E-way bill irrespective of any consignment value:
Where goods are sent by a principal located in one State or Union territory to a job worker located in any other State or Union territory, the e-way bill shall be generated either by the principal or the job worker, if registered, irrespective of the value of the consignment.
A person who has been exempted from registration under clauses (i) and (ii) of Section 24 and making inter-state movement of handicraft goods shall generate E-way bill irrespective of the value of the consignment.
Meaning of Person causing the movement:
Broadly, the movement of goods may either be caused by registered consignor (supplier) or registered consignee (recipient) or where the goods are supplied by unregistered person as consignor to a registered recipient, then, such consignee shall be treated as the person causing the movement of goods.
Who can ge

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

produced at the time of delivery.
Time Validity for filling up Part B of Form EWB 01:
Details in Part B shall be furnished within15 days of furnishing details in Part A, because unique number generated after furnishing details in Part A shall become invalid after 15 days.
Generation of E-way bill – Optional:
In certain cases, E-way bill may be generated at the option of consignor or consignee or transporter and these situations should be either of the following:
* Where consignment value is less than fifty thousand rupees; or
* Where movement of goods is taking place between unregistered supplier and unregistered recipient;
Consolidated E-way bill:
A transporter may, at his option, generate a consolidated E-way bill in Form EWB-02 by indicating serial number of all the e-way bills generated, where multiple consignments are intended to be transported in one conveyance.
Details to be filled in Part A & Part B of Form EWB 01:
Following data are to be furnished in Part A which

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

gle indivisible unit and which exceeds the dimensional limits prescribed in Rule 93 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, made under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988).
Validity period of one day shall be counted as:
* 1st day: Mid-night of the date following the date on which E-way bill is generated.
* All subsequent day: Mid night of the date.
However, this period of one day may be extended by the commissioner for certain categories of goods which may be notified on recommendation of GST Council.
Extension of Time Validity of E-way bill:
Provided further that, where under circumstances of an exceptional nature, including trans-shipment, the goods cannot be transported within the validity period of the e-way bill, the transporter may extend the validity period after updating the details in Part B of FORM GST EWB-01, if required.
Acceptance / Rejection of E-way bill:
The details of e-way bill generated shall be made available to-
* supplier, if registered, where

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ied in transit in accordance with the provisions of Rule 138B.
Details of conveyance in Part B: When not to be furnished/updated
* Where the goods are transported for a distance of upto fifty kilometers within the State or Union territory from the place of business of the consignor to the place of business of the transporter for further transportation;
* Where, goods are transferred from one conveyance to another, and goods are transported for a distance of upto fifty kilometres within the State or Union territory from the place of business of the transporter finally to the place of business of the consignee, the details of the conveyance may not be updated in the e-way bill.
E- Way Bill – When not required:
Certain categories of movements where E-waybill shall not be required to be generated and carried are as under:
* 8 Notified goods in Annexure to Rule 138 including LPG, postal baggage, jewellery, currency, used personal and household effects, etc.
* Where goods are tr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ion No. 26/2017 dated September 21, 2017 by the Department of Atomic Energy to the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd
* Movement of goods caused by defence formation under Ministry of defence as a consignor or consignee ;
* where the consignor of goods is the Central Government, Government of any State or a local authority for transport of goods by rail;
* where empty cargo containers are being transported;
* Movement of goods from place of business of consignor to weighbridge and vice-versa, where the distance is upto twenty kilometres, however goods in this case must be accompanied by a delivery challan.
Other important provisions pertaining to E-way bill:
* Shifting of goods from one conveyance to another
Where the goods are transferred from one conveyance to another, the consigner or the recipient, who has provided information in Part A of the FORM GST EWB-01, or the transporter shall, before such transfer and further movement of goods, update the details of convey

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ctions:
Earlier a FAQ was issued by department and it was opined that generation of two E-way Bills will be required if “Bill to” and “Ship to” parties are two different persons in GST.
However, now this complexity will be handled through the capturing of place of dispatch in Part A of E-way Bill.
Specific Provision pertaining to E -way Bill applicable from a date to be notified:
Where the consignor or the consignee has not generated the E-way bill in FORM GST EWB-01 and the aggregate of the consignment value of goods carried in the conveyance is more than fifty thousand rupees, the transporter, except in case of transportation of goods by railways, air and vessel, shall, in respect of inter-State supply, generate the e-way bill in FORM GST EWB-01 on the basis of invoice or bill of supply or delivery challan, as the case may be, and may also generate a consolidated e-way bill in FORM GST EWB-02 on the common portal prior to the movement of goods:
Provided that where the goods to

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ry; or
* a delivery challan, where the goods are transported other than by way of supply.
Further, instead of tax invoice, a registered person may produce for verification, an Invoice Reference Number (IRN) generated on common portal after uploading tax invoice details in Form INV-1. The IRN shall be valid for a period of 30 days and the details in Part A of Form EWB-01 shall be auto-populated on the basis of information furnished in Form INV-1.
Verification of Documents and Conveyance
The commissioner or any officer empowered by him may authorize proper officer to intercept and carry physical or electronic verification of e-way bill and also verification of conveyance. However, on receipt of specific information on evasion of tax, physical verification of a specific conveyance can also be carried out by any other officer after obtaining necessary approval of the Commissioner or an officer authorised by him in this behalf.
Where commissioner has notified certain transporter to e

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Versus Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (Admn) DGSTO-5,
VAT and Sales Tax
2018 (9) TMI 296 – KARNATAKA HIGH COURT – TMI
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 3-4-2018
W.P.Nos.11916-11920 & 12854-12857/2018 (T-RES)
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
MRS. S. SUJATHA J.
Petitioner [By Sri V. Raghuraman, Adv.]  
RESPONDENTS [By Sri T.K. Vedamurthy, AGA.)  
O R D E R
Petitioner has called in question the legality and correctness of the orders dated 8.9.2017 passed by the Respondent No.1 enclosed as Annexures-A1, A2 and A3 to the writ petitions as well as endorsement dated 8.2.2018 issued by the Respondent No.1 enclosed as Annexure-B to the writ petitions and the consequential endorsement dated 14.02.2018 issued by the Respondent No.2 enclosed as Annexures-C1, C2, C3 and C4 to the writ petitions.
2. Petitioner is engaged in execution of civil works contract of construction of buildings and other works contract for private parties and G

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t was passed by the Respondent No.2 for the period April 2011 to March 2012 on 26.06.2013 and reassessment order under Section 39[1] of the Act was passed by the Respondent No.2 for the period April 2012 to March 2013 on 29.07.2013. The amount demanded pursuant to these reassessment orders was remitted by the petitioner with interest. The Respondent No.2 again resorted to assessment and issued three separate notices under section 39[2] of the Act for the tax periods April 2010 to March 2013 alleging that the claim of labour and like charges at 30% on the total contract receipts which includes taxes collected and again allowing deduction towards taxes collected to arrive at taxable works contract receipts resulted in excess allowance of labour charges on the taxes collected which resulted in short payment of tax.
3. The petitioner submitted his reply to the said proposition notices issued under Section 39[2] of the Act. Considering the objections filed by the petitioner, Respondent No.

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

y same tax periods April 2010 to March 2013 on the very same ground that deduction of 30% as labour and like charges claimed by the petitioner has resulted in excess deduction and short payment of taxes. The petitioner replied to the said notice issued under Section 63-A[1] of the Act. After considering the reply, the Respondent No.1 proceeded to pass the orders revising the order of the Respondent No.2 dated 16.08.2014 passed under Section 39[2] of the Act for the tax periods April 2010 to March 2013. Pursuant to the orders passed by the Respondent No.1, petitioner has filed rectification application under Section 69 of the Act which came to be rejected. These orders of the Respondent No.1 passed under Section 63-A[1] of the Act as well as endorsements issued by the Respondent No.1 rejecting the rectification application are impugned herein.  
4. The main ground of challenge in these writ petitions is regarding the jurisdiction of the Respondent No.1 to pass an order under Secti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

[39] STC 177.
[b] 'V. JAGANMOHAN RAO v. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX AND EXCESS PROFITS TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH' reported in 1970 [75] ITR 373.
[c] 'M/s. KUNDAN LAL SRIKISHAN, MATHURA [U.P.] v. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P. AND ANOTHER' reported in 1987 [1] SCC 684.
7. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents supporting the impugned orders, would submit that the Respondent No.1 is empowered to revise the order passed by the Assessing Authority dropping the proceedings under Section 39[2] of the Act. Dropping of reassessment proceedings initiated by the Respondent No.2 being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, it cannot be held that the Respondent No.1 had no jurisdiction to invoke Section 63-A[1] of the Act, to revise such orders.
8. Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that the Respondent No.2 failed to act upon the notices issued under Section 39[2][e] of the Act, which constrained the Respondent No.1 to proceed wit

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e the order made on reassessment. The initial order for reassessment cannot be said to survive, even partially, although the justification for reassessment arises because of turnover escaping assessment in a limited field or only with respect to a part of the matter covered by the initial assessment order.”
12. Similarly, in the case of JAGANMOHAN RAO supra, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:
“Section 34 in terms states that once the Income-tax Officer decides to reopen the assessment he could do so within the period prescribed by serving on the person liable to pay tax a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in a notice under section 22[2] and may proceed to assess or reassess such income, profits or gains. It is, therefore, manifest that once assessment is reopened by issuing a notice under sub-section [2] of section 22 the previous under assessment is set aside and the whole assessment proceedings start afresh. When once valid proceeding

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

from the date of the original assessment order but from the date of the earlier rectification order. In Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. H.R. Sri Ramulu this Court has clearly laid down that when once a notice is issued for purposes of making reassessment the assessment proceedings become re-opened and the initial order of assessment ceases to be operative. The Court has further held that the effect of the re-opening of the assessment is to vacate or set aside the initial order of assessment and to substitute in its place the order made on reassessment and that the result of re-opening of the assessment is that a fresh order for reassessment would have to be made in respect of all matters including those matters in respect of which there is no allegation of the turnover escaping assessment. The same principle should apply even to a case like the present one where an application for rectification is filed after the completion of the reassessment proceedings”.
14. In the ligh

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

eady issued by the Respondent No.2 under Section 39[2][e] of the Act.  
16. In the circumstances, it can be held that the proceedings initiated by the Respondent No.1 under Section 63-A[1] of the Act is without jurisdiction and nullity in the eye of law. Hence, for the aforesaid reasons, the orders impugned cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed.
17. Accordingly, the impugned orders are quashed with liberty to the Respondent No.2 to proceed with the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 39[2][e] of the Act in accordance with law.
18. Writ petitions stand disposed of in terms of the above. The Respondent No.2 shall conclude the reassessment proceedings in an expedite manner. Petitioner shall appear before the Respondent No.2 on 24.04.2018 without expecting any further notice. The Respondent No.2 shall hear the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.  
All rights and contentions of the parties are left open to be adjudicated before

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

CCE & GST, Delhi Versus M/s. Providence Equity Advisors India Ltd.
Service Tax
2018 (4) TMI 1583 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 3-4-2018
Service Tax Appeal No. 50301/2018 (SM) – Final Order No. 51135/2018
Service Tax
Hon'ble Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
Shri K. Podar, DR-For the Appellant.
Shri Gagan Kumar, Advocate-For the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
Per Archana Wadhwa:
Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the party had filed instant refund claims seeking refund of CENVAT Credit for Banking & Financial Services, which have been exported out of India under Notification No.27/2012

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

iled the present appeals both dated 20.03.2017.
3. The Commissioner (Appeals) examined the meaning of 'all other services' as mentioned in the definition of 'total turnover' under Rule 5 (1) E of CCR, 2004 and observed that the definition of 'all other services' has not been provided in CCR, 2004. As per the 'Law of purposive interpretation' the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the text proceeding the phrase 'all other services' is 'export turnover' . Hence, 'all other services' would mean 'value of all services other than the exported service'. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that in CCE vs. Aam Services India Pvt. Ltd. [2016 (42) STR 760 (Tribunal- Mumbai)], the Hon'ble Tribunal held that when entire turnover is exported and no o

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ia Pvt. Ltd. – 2016 (42) STR 760 (Tribunal-Mumbai) relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals).
6. I find that apart from the said decision, the Appellate Authority has also referred to the Hon'ble High Court's decision in the case of CST Vs. Quintiles Technologies Ltd. – 2015 (40) STR 237 (Guj.), wherein various decisions of the Tribunal on the said decision including the decision in the case of Aam Services India Pvt. Ltd (supra) were considered. Accordingly, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held in favour of the assessee. I find that inasmuch as the issue stands decided by the various decisions referred to in the impugned order, which have not been distinguished by the Revenue in their memo of appeal and the applicability of the same has no

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd. Versus The Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai North Commissionerate
Service Tax
2018 (5) TMI 404 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. J25 (Tri. – Chennai)
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 3-4-2018
Application Nos. ST/Misc/CT/40128-40160/2018, ST/EH/40161-40193/2018 and Appeal Nos. ST/41645-41677/2015 – Final Order No. 41015-41047 / 2018
Service Tax
Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Hon'ble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri V. Vikram, Advocate For the Appellant
Ms. P. Hemavathi, Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
The MAs filed by Revenue for change cause title are allowed. As we take up the appeals themselves for hearing and disposal, the other MAs filed by Revenue for grant of early hearing get disposed of.
2. The facts of the case are that that the appellant, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as TASMAC) is a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

shop raised by the current year growth rate @ 10% and the highest bidder is granted permission for sale of eatables and to collect the empty liquor bottles on payment of security deposit which is equal to the consideration payable for 2 months. The licence fee collected on monthly basis is accounted under 'Income from Operations' in their Profit & Loss Account. It appeared to the department that the contractors can conduct their business only after issue of a licence by TASMAC, on payment of licence fee; that without the support of TASMAC in the form of giving permission to sell eatables and to collect empty bottles, contractors would have no business; therefore upto 30-06-2012, the services rendered by TASMAC is a taxable service under 'Support Service of Business or Commerce' under Section 65 (104c) read with Section 65 (105) (zzzq) of the Finance Act, 1994; that after 1.7.2012, the services are continued to be taxable since they are not covered under the negative list or ot

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

um
3. On 08-03-2018, when the matter came up for hearing, the appellants were represented by Shri V.Vikram, Advocate made oral and written submissions which can be broadly summarized as under :
i) TASMAC is not rendering any service directly or indirectly to consumers. TASMAC is a seller of a liquor and not service provider.
ii) TASMAC is an institution created by Statute and acting on behalf of the State Government of Tamil Nadu
iii) The buyers of the Liquor from TASMAC shop and consume (sit and drink) the same at the adjacent place which is called a 'Bar'; the rules governing the Bar are also governed by Statute which prescribes the location, timings, holidays of the Bar too.
iv) TASMAC is solely responsible for retailing liquor to pubic; while doing so it has responsibility to make sure liquor is consumed safely in bar's adjacent to it. Merely because these bars are run by third- parties selected by TASMAC through tender as opposed to being run by TASMAC itself cann

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed with rights such as mining rights i.e. those rights which are all handed exclusively by the State.
viii) The decision to float tender to selected third parties / contractors to run bars adjacent to TASMAC shops was pursuant to decision taken by the TASMAC Board of Directors comprising of senior government officers. In the conduct of the tender process and the grant of permission to run the bars and assigning of the work of collection of empty bottles, TASMAC was only acting as agent of the State exercising its sovereign rights. The definition of 'Business Support Service' will clearly fall outside the ambit of appellant's activities and since services which are provided by a Government in terms of their sovereign right to business activities, and which are not substitutable in any manner by any private entity, are not support services. Examples of exercise of such sovereign functions would be grant of mining or licensing rights or audit of Government entities by CAG etc. Reference

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ed out any fraud or exercised any wilful misconduct. So also, the contention of department that appellant has not obtained registration is incorrect since they had registered under GTA service and had been filing ST-3 returns.
4. (i) On the other hand, the department represented by Ld. Commissioner (A.R) Ms. P. Hemavathi vehemently opposed the appeal.
(ii) Ld. A.R took us through the definition of 'Business Support Service' introduced w.e.f. 1.5.2006.
(iii) She submitted that the services provided by TASMAC are clearly such that are provided only in relation to business or commerce.
(iv) The definition is an inclusive definition. Only few examples of similar activities which can be included under that service category have been included in the definition.
(v) TASMAC have permitted the contractors to sell eatables and collect empty liquor bottles in the bars by way of tender. The fees so collected are in the nature of income for TASMAC and definitely cannot be considered as a s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

services outsourced by business entities for use in business or commerce are very much taxable as 'Business Support Service' and that the definition only gives indicative list of such outsourced services. The activity of TASMAC in permitting the contractor to sell eatables in the bar and to collect empty bottles and sell them provides support to the business of such contractors. Hence they cannot escape tax liability under the said category.
5. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts.
6.1 The period of dispute encompasses October 2008 to March 2013. The impugned order has held that the activities of TASMAC would fall within the ambit of 'Support Service of Business or Commerce' defined under Section 65B (44) for the remaining period.
6.2 The core issue that therefore comes up for decision is whether this assertion of the adjudicating authority is correct or otherwise.
6.3 For the period upto 30.06.2012, the definition of 'Support Service of Business or Commerc

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ct, 1994 which reads as under :
“Taxable Service” means any service provided or to be provided to any person, by any other person, in relation to support services of business or commerce, in any manner”
An analysis of the definition in Section 65 (104c) indicates that while it is indeed an inclusive definition, the type of services sought to be taxed are those of the genre and outsources services normally prevalent in business and commerce like evaluation of prospective customers, telemarketing, processing of purchase orders and fulfilment services, information and tracking of delivery schedules etc. In our view, the intention of the legislature to bring within the ambit of 'Business Support Services' only outsourced activities relating to management, logistics and customer relations etc. is vindicated by the Explanation to the said definition which exemplifies 'infrastructural support services' as providing office along with office utilities, lounge, reception with competen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

s that 'when two or more words which are susceptible of analogous meaning are coupled together, they are understood to be used in their cognate sense. They take as it were their colour from each other, that is, the more general is restricted to a sense analogous to a less general.'
In 'Principles of Statutory Interpretation' by Justice G.P. Singh, the said maxim is further explained as follows :
“Associated words take their meaning from one another under the doctrine of noscitur a sociis, the philosophy of which is that the meaning of the doubtful word may be ascertained by reference to the meaning of words associated with it; such doctrine is broader than the maxim ejusdem generis.” In fact the latter maxim 'is only an illustration or specific application of the broader maxim noscitur a sociis'. It must be borne in mind that noscitur a sociis, is merely a rule of construction and it cannot prevail in cases where it is clear that the wider words have been deliberatel

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

immediate connection with the type of activities exemplified in the inclusive definition of 'Support Services of Business or Commerce'.
6.7 We are therefore not able to find favour with the proposition that the income generated by the appellant by way of collecting fees from tenders for contracting the impugned activities to successful contractors can, by any stretch of imagination are to be considered as taxable income and become liable to service tax under BSS. We have thus no hesitation in setting aside that part of the impugned order which has confirmed the tax liability on the appellant for the period upto 30.06.2012 under 'Business Support Service' defined under Section 65 (104c) read with Section 65 (105) (zzzq) of the Finance Act, 1994.
6.8 However, the position changes after the introduction of the Negative List regime w.e.f. 1.7.2012, from which date the activities which were liable to service tax under Finance Act, 1994 were given a much wider and broad banded sco

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ipalities and Members of other local authorities who receive any consideration in performing the functions of that office as such member; or
(B) the duties performed by any person who holds any post in pursuance of the provisions of the Constitution in that capacity;' or
(C) the duties performed by any person as a Chairperson or a Member of a Director in a body established by the Central Government of State Governments or local authority and who is not deemed as an employee before the commencement of this section.
Explanation 2 – for the purposes of this clause, transaction in money shall not include any activity 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.
…. … ….”
6.9 Then, w.e.f. 1-7-2012, all services except those excluded by Section 65B (44), in particular, transfer of title in goods, deemed sale, transacti

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

een prepared and audited only in terms of Section 227 (4A) of the Companies Act, 1956 and in terms with the accounting standards referred to in Section 211 (3C) of the Companies Act, 1956. Even the Supplementary Audit conducted by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India of TASMAC has been carried out in terms of Section 619 (3) (b) of the Companies Act, 1956 only. The activities of TASMAC for most of the period under dispute cannot therefore be said to be activities assigned and performed by sovereign / public authority under the authority of law.
6.12 We find that this aspect has been also clarified by the CBEC in Master Circular No.96/7/2007-ST dt. 23.08.2007, which is further reiterated by Circular No.89/7/2006 dt. 18.12.2006 where it is inter alia clarified as follows :
“However, if a sovereign / public authority provides a service, which is not in the nature of statutory activity and the same is undertaken for a consideration (not a statutory fee), then in such cases, serv

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

urt in the case of Karnataka Government Insurance Department Vs Asst.CCE Bangalore – 2012 (26) STR 521 (Kar.), which ratio was echoed by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court as reported in 2012 (28) STR 337 (Kar.) and also by the High Court of Allahabad in the case of Greater Noida Industrial Developmental Authority Vs CCE & CE reported in 2015-TIOL- 1008-HC-ALL-ST.
6.15. Along with the introduction of Negative List of services, CBEC thought it proper to issue an Education Guide, giving the official Guidelines for new system of Levy of Service Tax on the basis of negative List w.e.f. 1.7.2012, wherein the issue whether entities like statutory body, corporation or an authority constituted under an Act passed by Parliament or State Legislature is 'Government' or Local authority' was addressed in para 2.4.7 which reads as follows :
“2.4.10 Would various entities like a statutory body, corporation or an authority constituted under an Act passed by the Parliament or any of the State

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

also do not all in the definition of 'local authority.
Thus regulatory bodies and other autonomous entitled which attain their entity under an act would not comprise either government or local authority.”
6.16 At the same time, we take note that in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 17-C, 17-D, 21 and 22-D read with Section 54 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937, in Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003 was amended by insertion of Rule 9A w.e.f. 29.03.2013 as follows :
“9A. Grant of privilege to run the bar:- The privilege of running bars may be granted to private parties by tender. The Board of the Corporation may decide the upset price and other terms and conditions of tender, from time to time, with the prior approval of the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise. The Corporation, as agency shall collect the tender amount from the successful tenders and remit the same to the Government on or before the 25th of the following month and the Co

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t has agreed that appellant is liable to pay service tax only on the 1% of the payments made by contractors. He has placed copy of OIA No.262/2017 dt. 30.11.2017 before us. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide the said order has held that TASMAC is liable to pay service tax only on the 1% commission retained by them for the period April 2013 to March 2014 and April 2014 to March 2015. The ld. Counsel prays that the same benefit may be extended to the intervening period of 1.7.2012 to 28.3.2013. We are afraid that this contention is not acceptable as it is not based on any legal footing, but only principles of equity. There is no equity in fiscal law. Therefore, we hold that TASMAC is liable to pay service tax of the licence fees received for the period 1.7.2012 to 28.3.2013. So ordered.
6.19 Coming to the matter of penalty, we find that the entire dispute is one of interpretation and even from the record, we find that there are at least two circulars before introduction of negative list re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

To prescribe the due dates for furnishing of FORM GSTR-1 for those taxpayers with aggregate turnover of more than 1.5 crores.
18/2018-State Tax Dated:- 3-4-2018 Maharashtra SGST
GST – States
Maharashtra SGST
Maharashtra SGST
COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, MAHARASHTRA STATE
GST Bhavan, Mazgaon, Mumbai 400 010,
dated the 3rd April 2018.
NOTIFICATION
Notification No. 18/2018-State Tax
MAHARASHTRA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017.
No. JC(HQ)-1/GST/2018/Noti/Returns/ADM-8.-In exercise of the powers conferred by the second proviso to sub-section (1) of section 37 read with section 168 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Mah. XLIII of 2017) (hereinafter in this notification referred to as the ” said Act “), the Co

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Extends the time limit for furnishing the return by an Input Service Distributor in FORM GSTR-6
19/2018-State Tax Dated:- 3-4-2018 Maharashtra SGST
GST – States
Maharashtra SGST
Maharashtra SGST
COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, MAHARASHTRA STATE
GST Bhavan, Mazgaon, Mumbai 400 010,
dated the 3rd April 2018.
NOTIFICATION
Notification No. 19/2018-State Tax
MAHARASHTRA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017.
No. JC(HQ)-1/GST/2018/Noti/Returns/ADM-8.-In exercise of the powers conferred by s

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Sri Raghavendra Traders Versus The Government Of Karnataka
GST
2018 (4) TMI 1291 – KARNATAKA HIGH COURT – [2018] 2 GSTL 46 (Kar), 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 439 (Kar.)
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 3-4-2018
W. P. Nos. 13839/2018 & 13941/2018 (T-RES)
GST
MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA  J.
Petitioner [By Sri A. Srikanth., Adv.]  
Respondents: [By Sri Vikram Huilgol., HCGP)  
O R D E R
Petitioner has challenged the order passed by second respondent at Annexures-F and F1 both dated 22.03.2018, one under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ('CGST Act' for short) and another under the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ('KGST Act' for short) respectively, interalia seeking for a direction to release the vehicle bearing registration No.TN-77D-8555 along with the goods which are detained by the Authorities.
2. It is the contention of the petitioner that a consignment regarding the transaction of the invoice No.481 dated 07.08.2018 issued throug

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

same, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the full tax amount pertaining to the tax invoice submitted before the second respondent has been deposited, no vehicle/conveyance and goods are released till date. Learned counsel would fairly submit that the petitioner shall pursue the alternative an d efficacious remedy available under the Act which would be time consuming, since the livelihood of the petitioner has been adversely affected owing to the seizure of the vehicle/conveyance in question, a fervent plea is made to release the vehicle/conveyance along with the goods with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal as provided under the Act.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents justifying the impugned order would contend that no documents were placed before the Authorities at the time of the intercept ion of the vehicle/conveyance by the driver/person in-charge of the goods vehicle. Tax invoic

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

t the main dispute is relating to the valuation of the goods carried in the goods vehicle. It is an admitted fact that no documents were carried by the driver/person in-charge of the goods vehicle at the time of interception of the goods vehicle on 08.03.2018. The ownership of the goods as well as quantum of penalty levied are also in dispute. These are all the factual disputes to be adjudicated before the Appellate Authority. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to relegate the petitioner to the Appellate Authority without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. However in the circumstances, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the second respondent to release the vehicle/conveyance along with the goods forthwith subject to the petitioner furnishing the bank guarantee of Rs. 9,23,650/- along with the deposit of Rs. 1,08, 026/- in addition to the amount already deposited.
7. The Authorities shall release the vehicle as well as the goods forthwith subject to the paymen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Modern Traders Versus State of U.P. And 2 Others
GST
2018 (4) TMI 1076 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (12) G. S. T. L. 7 (All.)
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 3-4-2018
Writ Tax No. 576 of 2018
GST
Hon'ble Krishna Murari And Hon'ble Ashok Kumar, JJ.
For the Petitioner : Nishant Mishra,Vipin Kumar Kushwaha
For the Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
Heard Sri Nishant Mishra assisted by Sri Vipin Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel representing the State- respondents.
The petitioner being a proprietorship firm is engaged in trading of iron and steel as well as their products and is registered under the provisions of the UPGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Assessing Authority has allotted GSTIN no. to the petitioner. The petitioner has sold 10.110 MT of Iron Scrap vide Invoice dated 24.03.2018 for the value of Rs. 1,67,017/- to M/s R.K. Enterprises of Delhi in which

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ire seizure proceedings are not only illegal but clearly is abuse of process of law as well as misuse of power. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the respondent no.3 was insisting for seizure on the ground of non-production of e-way bill, the petitioner has downloaded the e-way bill-02 on 24.3.2018 itself just after 15 minutes from the time of detention of the vehicle and has produced the same before the respondent no.3.
The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that without considering the e-way bill-02 which has been furnished immediately within 20 minutes from the time of the detention of the vehicle/goods, the respondent no.3 has illegally passed the seizure order after a gap of four days i.e. on 28.3.2018 by which he has seized the goods as well as vehicle in question. The seizure order indicates that the goods/vehicle has been solely seized on the ground that goods were being transported without e-way bill-02 which has been prescribed under the UPGST Rule

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

uld not invalidate the same.
The provisions of UPGST are applicable to transactions within the State of U.P. whereas IGST covers the interstate transactions.
Section 20 of the IGST makes applicable the provisions of Central GST in respect to matters relating to inspection, search and seizure under the said Act.
Rule 138 of the Rules framed under the Central GST provides that till such time e-way bill system is developed and approved by the Council, the Government by notification may specify the documents which are to be carried with the consignment of goods. In exercise of the said power a notification has been issued which provides for the carrying of e-way bill with the goods in transit but the same is applicable has been enforced w.e.f. 1st February, 2018 and not before.
Simultaneously, UPGST also contains similar provisions and in exercise of the power under Rule 138 of the Rules framed under the UPGST by a notification dated 21.07.2017 has made e-way bill mandatory but that ma

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Navyug Airconditioning Versus State Of U.P. And 02 Others
GST
2018 (4) TMI 886 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 559 (All.)
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 3-4-2018
Writ Tax No. 551 of 2018
GST
Hon'ble Krishna Murari And Hon'ble Ashok Kumar, JJ.
For the Petitioner : Nishant Mishra
For the Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
Heard Sri Nishant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner assisted by Sri Vipin Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate and Sri C.B. Tripathi, Special Counsel for the State of U.P.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the seizure of his goods vide impugned order dated 25.03.2018 passed under Section 129(1) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the U.P.G.S.T.).

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

S.T. makes applicable the provisions of Central G.S.T. in respect to matters relating to inspection, search and seizure under the said Act.
Rule 138 of the Rules framed under the Central G.S.T. provides that till such time E-Way bill system is developed and approved by the Council, the Government by notification may specify the documents which are to be carried with the consignment of goods. In exercise of the said power a notification has been issued which provides for the carrying of E-Way bill with the goods in transit but the same is applicable has been enforced w.e.f. 1st February, 2018 and not before.
Simultaneously, U.P.G.S.T. also contains similar provisions and in exercise of the power under Rule 138 of the Rules framed under the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

M/s Bhumika Enterprises Versus State of U.P. And 3 Others
GST
2018 (4) TMI 530 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (12) G. S. T. L. 137 (All.) , [2018] 1 GSTL 123 (All). [2018] 53 G S.T.R. 356 (All)
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 3-4-2018
Writ Tax No. 564 of 2018
GST
Hon'ble Krishna Murari And Hon'ble Ashok Kumar, JJ.
For the Petitioner : Murari Mohan Rai,Nitin Kesarwani
For the Respondent : C.S.C.,A.S.G.I.
ORDER
Heard Sri Nitin Kesarwani and Sri M.M. Rai, learned counsels for the petitioner, Sri Vinay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned special counsel for the State.
By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the seizure order dated 27.3.2018 passed under Section 129(1) of the U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017 as well as the show cause notice issued under Section 129(3) of the said Act dated 27.3.2018 respectively.
The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered dealer and ha

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ntention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no opportunity of being heard has been afforded to the petitioner before passing the seizure order dated 27.3.2018 under Section 129(1) of the Act by which the respondent no.4/seizing authority has seized the goods on the ground that the tax invoice was kept in a sealed envelope, the goods was being transported without E-way bill-02, the GSTIN number written on the tax invoice belongs to another dealer situates at Allahabad and not the consignee situated at Bindiki, Fatehpur as also the mobile number.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that while issuing the show cause notice dated 27.3.2018 the Mobile Squad Authority had indicated for submission of the defence reply before him on 2.4.2018 and to explain as to why tax being not realized as also the penalty be imposed. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that that due to technical fault of the State Web-site E-way bill-02 could n

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

f tax as the tax amounting to the tune of Rs. 1,08,000/- as C.G.S.T. and S.G.S.T. was charged by the petitioner himself and the same was duly mentioned in the tax invoice separately.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has submitted that there was no occasion to mention the G.S.Tin number of different dealer in the invoice, though he has accepted that the same has been correctly mentioned in the E-way bill. The learned counsel for the State has further submitted that admittedly at the time of inspection/detention of the vehicle there was no E-way bill available with the driver of the vehicle.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
From perusal of the record we have noticed that the vehicle has been detained and the goods/vehicle was seized by the respondent no.4 on 27.3.2018 whereas the time has been granted for submission of reply and appearance of the person concerned before the respondent no.4 on the later date. There is no dispute with

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

/s Ram Narsh Ramakant, Bindki, Fatehpur and the same was available with the seizing authority and we see no reason as to why the seizing authority has not made any effort to make inquiry from the said dealer/consignee whose TIN number was mentioned in the tax invoice. We see that the seizing authority though has mentioned the GSTIN number of some dealer situates at Allahabad but no details of the said dealer has been given in the impugned seizure order nor the details of the mobile number holder.
Since the tax invoice indicating the tax charged and the same admittedly found during the course of inspection/detention and E-way bill-02 has been downloaded much before the seizure order, we see no justification in the impugned seizure order and therefore, we have no option but to allow the present writ petition and to set aside the seizure order dated 27.3.2018 as well as the show cause notice issued under Section 129(3) of the Act for imposition of penalty.
In view of the aforesaid facts

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

General Equipments And Techonology Suppliers Versus Asst. State Tax Officer, Thiruvananthapuram
GST
2018 (4) TMI 348 – KERALA HIGH COURT – [2018] 2 GSTL 75 (Ker)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 3-4-2018
W. P. (C). No. 11146 of 2018
GST
MR. P. B. SURESH KUMAR, J.
For The Petitioner : Sri. S. Anil Kumar (Trivandrum)
For The Respondent : Sri. V. K. Shamsudheen
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks release of the goods detained by the respondent under Section 129 of the Central Goods a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Extend the time limit for furnishing the details or return details of outward supply of goods or services or both in FORM GSTR-1 -the registered persons having aggregate turnover of up to 1.5 crore rupees.
S.O. 163 Dated:- 3-4-2018 Bihar SGST
GST – States
Bihar SGST
Bihar SGST
Bihar Government
Commercial Tax Department
Notification
The 3rd April 2018
S.O. 163, dated 3rd April 2018- In exercise of the powers conferred by section 148 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017) (hereafter in this notification referred to as the Act), the Governor of Bihar, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby notifies the registered persons having aggregate turnover of up to 1.5 crore rupees in the preceding financial

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Setting up of an IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism to address the grievances of taxpayers due to technical glitches on GST Portal-reg.
39/13/2018 Dated:- 3-4-2018 CGST – Circulars / Ordes
GST
Circular No. 39/13/2018-GST
F. No. 267/7/2018-CX.8
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs
New Delhi, dated the 3rd April, 2018
To
The Principal Chief Commissioners/ Chief Commissioners/ Principal Commissioners/ Commissioner of Central Tax (All),
The Principal Director Generals/ Director Generals (All).
Sub: Setting up of an IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism to address the grievances of taxpayers due to technical glitches on GST Portal-reg.
Madam/Sir,
It has been decided to put in place an IT-Grievance Redressal Mechanism to address the difficulties faced by a section of taxpayers owing to technical glitches on the GST portal and the relief that needs to be given to them. The relief could be in the nature of allow

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

d issues such as non-availability of internet connectivity or failure of power supply, this mechanism shall not be available.
4. IT-Grievance Redressal Committee
Any issue which needs to be addressed through this mechanism shall be identified by GSTN and the method of resolution approved by the GST Implementation Committee (GIC) which shall act as the IT Grievance Redressal Committee. In GIC meetings convened to address IT issues or IT glitches, the CEO, GSTN and the DG (Systems), CBEC shall participate in these meetings as special invitees.
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 wh

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

as may be necessary.
6.3 IT-Grievance Redressal Committee may give directions as necessary to GSTN and field formations of the tax administrations for implementation of the decision.
7. Legal issues
7.1 Where an IT related glitch has been identified as the reason for failure of a taxpayer in filing of a return or form prescribed in the law, the consequential fine and penalty would also be required to be waived. GST Council has delegated the power to the IT Grievance Redressal Committee to recommend waiver of fine or penalty, in case of an emergency, to the Government in terms of section 128 of the CGST Act, 2017 under such mitigating circumstances as are identified by the committee. All such notifications waiving fine or penalty shall be placed before GST Council.
7.2 Where adequate time is available, the issue of waiver of fee and penalty shall be placed before the GST Council with recommendation of the IT-Grievance Redressal Committee.
8. Resolution of stuck TRAN-1s and filing

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

1, which could not be filed. If needed, GSTN may request field formations of Centre and State to collect additional document/ data etc. or verify the same to identify taxpayers who should be allowed this procedure.
8.3 GSTN shall communicate directly with the taxpayers in this regard and submit a final report to GIC about the number of TRAN-1s filed and submitted through this process.
8.4 The taxpayers shall complete the process of filing of TRAN 1 stuck due to IT glitches, as discussed above, by 30th April 2018 and the process of completing filing of GSTR 3B which could not be filed for such TRAN 1 shall be completed by 31st May 2018.
9. The decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts of Allahabad, Bombay etc., where no case specific decision has been taken, may be implemented in-line with the procedure prescribed above, subject to fulfilment of the conditions prescribed therein. Where these conditions are not satisfied, Hon'ble Courts may be suitably informed and if needed review or appe

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

E-Way Bill in case of Exports
Query (Issue) Started By: – ROHIT GOEL Dated:- 2-4-2018 Last Reply Date:- 7-4-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 2 Replies
GST
How to generate e-way bill if goods are to be transported to the place of Clearing House agent for the purpose of exports..
Reply By Rajagopalan Ranganathan:
The Reply:
Sir,
As per Section 20 of IGST Act, 2017, e-way bill provisions prescribed by CGST Act, 2017 are not made applicable to IGST Act, 2017. Therefore e-way bil

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Smooth roll out of e-Way Bill system from 01stApril, 2018
GST
Dated:- 2-4-2018

As per decision of the GST Council, e-Way Bill system became mandatory from 01stApril, 2018 for all inter-State movement of goods. The implementation of the nationwide e-Way Bill mechanism under GST regime is being done by GSTN in association with the National Informatics Centre (NIC)and is being run on portal namely https://ewaybillgst.gov.in.
On day-1, total of 2.59 lakh e-Way Bills were generated on the e-way bill portal. Till 2:00 pm today, 2,04,563 e-way bills have been generated. A total of 11,18,292 taxpayers have registered on e-Way Bill Portal till date. Further 20,057 transporters have enrolled themselves on the e-Way Bill Portal.
To ass

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ate multiple Sub-Users and allocate roles to them. This way large transporters can declare their various offices as sub-users.
There isa provision for cancellation of e-way Bill within 24 hours by the person who has generated the e-way Bill. The recipient can also reject the e-way Bill within validity period of e-way bill or 72 hours of generation of the e-way bill by the consignor whichever is earlier.

State-wise breakup of e-Way Bills generated
Number of e-Way Bills Generated
01-04-2018
02-04-2018 (till 2PM)
State Name
No. of EWBs
No. of EWBs
JAMMU AND KASMIR
384
268
HIMACHAL PRADESH
2838
1716
PUNJAB
9342
2028
CHANDIGARH
1319
1000
UTTARAKHAND
6622
3016
HARYANA
21131
14985
DELHI
15376
11731
RAJASTHAN
2093

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Final Monthly collection figures of GST
GST
Dated:- 2-4-2018

The revenue collection figures under GST including CGST, SGST, IGST and cess for the period July 2017 – February 2018 paid in the period July 2017 – March 2018 is as follows:
(Figures in Rs. Crores)
Month
GST Collection
August
93,590
September
93,029
October
95,132
November
85,931
December
83,716
January
88,929
February
88,047
March
89,264
Total
7,17,638
Besides the above ₹ 27,811 crores were c

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Total 17,616 crore of Refunds issued under GST; 90% of IGST eligible claims have been approved
GST
Dated:- 2-4-2018

In line with commitment of government to liquidate all pending GST refunds, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has successfully concluded refund fortnight cum special drive from 15th March, 2018 to 31stMarch, 2018.
During the period, all field formations of CBIC worked hardto provide refund relief to the exporters. Special refund cells manned by experienced staff were put in place throughout the country. The exporter awareness campaigns using both print media and social media were carried out so that the benefit can be extended to maximum exporters. All field formations were tasked to go extr

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

oms of the period till 31stJanuary, 2018 are of ₹ 10,720 crore, out of which ₹ 9,604 crore have been sanctioned which is about 89.6% of those eligible claims transmitted by GSTN.
As regards to ITC refunds, ₹ 1,136 crore has been sanctioned during the special drive making the total figure of ITC sanctioned equal to ₹ 5,510 crore by end of this fiscal. As per the latest available data:
a. 1,61,325 refund applications have been filed in FORM GST RFD-01A on the common portal, in which an amount of ₹ 17,471crore has been claimed. Of these, 60,183 refund applications are in relation to zero rated supplies, in which an amount of ₹ 14,649 crore has been claimed. Taxpayers are required to submit a copy of these

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Sale of old car
Query (Issue) Started By: – Subir Bose Dated:- 2-4-2018 Last Reply Date:- 10-4-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 3 Replies
GST
Dear sir,
My partnership firm wants to sell a car purchased in the year 2009 to a unregistered person and also wants to buy a new car. So is gst applicable on sale and itc applucale on puchase of new car?
Subir Bose
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
GST is payable on sale of old car. ITC is not admissible on purchase of a new car. Re

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

LUT 2018-19
Query (Issue) Started By: – VSV & Co VSV & Co Dated:- 2-4-2018 Last Reply Date:- 5-4-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
Dear Sir,
My client has not applied for LUT online before 31st March,2018 , now he wants to export the goods tomorrow i.e. 3rd April 2018, what he suppost to do right now ?
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Either LUT/Bond or payment of IGST and get refund. No other option.
Reply By MistralSolutionsPrivateLimited:
The Reply:
LUT online filing can be done anytime before export.
Reply By Amit Kumar:
The Reply:
Well, there are two types of taxes in India; they are Direct Tax and Indirect Tax. Income Tax is a direct tax, which is directly paid by the taxpayer to the governmen

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

GST Applicability on Employee Reimbursement
Query (Issue) Started By: – AnilKumar Vyas Dated:- 2-4-2018 Last Reply Date:- 4-4-2018 Goods and Services Tax – GST
Got 5 Replies
GST
Dear Experts,
Please suggest, Is GST Applicable on following transactions:
* Payment to Employee for Vehicle running and maintenance charges at fix rate (example INR 8/- per KM) (Not part of Employee agreement and Salary offered)
Example:
We are paying INR 8/- per KM to X. during the month vehicle run 3,750 KM, Total amount paid INR 30,000/-
Is company liable to pay GST on these reimbursement under RCM for supply from unregistered dealer?
* Payment to Employee for Vehicle petrol expenses at fix (Example 4,000/- per month) (It is part of salary

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e reimbursement under RCM for supply from unregistered dealer?
Thanks for your valuable suggestion ……………………
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Query-wise reply is as under:-
1. No doubt these fixed expenses are not part of salary or employee agreement but these are provided on account of performing duty or we say when employees are performing duties in the employment. Therefore we can say that these fixed amounts are provided in the course or in relation to employment and hence are out of the purview of GST/definition of supply.
2. Not taxable, it being in the course or in relation to employment.
3. It is taxable on the following grounds:-
(i) it being in the course of business or in furtherance of business.
(ii) It

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

nt no 1 if the arrangement is not part of employee agreement and salary offered, can it still be said to be in the course of employment.
2. Regarding point no3 .. there may be problem in claiming ITC if only cash memo is there, since gstn of reciepient company is not there.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Sh.Shukla Ji,
Sir, Regarding query No.3, I agree with you.
Regarding query no. 2 Yes. This is my view.
Reply By Ganeshan Kalyani:
The Reply:
1. There is employer employee relationship so GST is not applicable. However, the same is not forming part of employment agreement and hence it may become taxable in the hands of the employee. But since his/her turnover would be below the threshold limit (based on the amount reimbursed the

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Smooth Roll-out of E-way Bill System from, 1st April, 2018
GST
Dated:- 2-4-2018

As per decision of the GST Council, e-Way Bill system became mandatory from 01st April, 2018 for all inter-State movement of goods. The implementation of the nationwide e-Way Bill mechanism under GST regime is being done by GSTN in association with the National Informatics Centre (NIC) and is being run on portal namely https://ewaybillgst.gov.in.
Heralding a paradigm shift in movement of goods from one State to another, trial run for e-way bills under the current GST regime was started on 16th January 2018 for the entire country.
A total of 10,96,905 taxpayers have registered on e-Way Bill Portal till date. Further 19,796 transporters, who are no

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Are we maintaining documents and records as required under GST Laws? – A Big Question
By: – Anuj Bansal
Goods and Services Tax – GST
Dated:- 2-4-2018

By this time every tax professional is aware that GST is mainly following various kinds of compliances like filing of returns, e-way bills, etc. The department is silent and accepting all the returns, etc., without raising much issues. The intention is to provide a breathing or settling time to industry. However, till date no attention is given to the documents or records maintained or to be maintained in order to support the details / data furnished in our returns, etc. For example, if the ITC relating to gifts, loss of goods, etc., is reversed, whether we are recording such gifts / loss in our stock register, as required under Rule 56(2) of the CGST Rules. Similarly, whether we are maintaining electronic back-up of all our documents / records, as required under Rule 57 of the CGST Rules. In other words, the department

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

hly production accounts showing quantitative details of raw materials or services used in the manufacture and quantitative details of the goods so manufactured including the waste and by products thereof;
Inward and outward supply of goods or services or both;
Stock of goods – Accounts of stock in respect of goods received and supplied, and such accounts shall contain the following particulars:
* Opening balance,
* Receipt,
* Supply,
* Goods lost, stolen, destroyed, written off or disposed of by way of gift or free sample
* Balance of stock
above stock shall be maintained for each of the items like raw materials, finished goods, scrap, wastage, etc.
Account of the goods or services imported or exported or of supplies attracting payment of tax on reverse charge along with the relevant documents, including invoices, bills of supply, delivery challans, credit notes, debit notes, receipt vouchers, payment vouchers and refund vouchers.
Every registered person shall keep a

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

plicable) of goods or services received for the execution of works contract;
* description, value and quantity (wherever applicable) of goods or services utilized in the execution of works contract;
* the details of payment received in respect of each works contract; and
* the names and addresses of suppliers from whom he received goods or services.
Every agent shall maintain accounts depicting the,-
* Particulars of authorization received by him from each principal to receive or supply goods or services on behalf of such principal separately;
* Particulars including description, value and quantity (wherever applicable) of goods or services received on behalf of every principal;
* Particulars including description, value and quantity (wherever applicable) of goods or services supplied on behalf of every principal;
* Details of accounts furnished to every principal; and
* Tax paid on receipts or on supply of goods or services effected on behalf of every principal.
Ev

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

e cover of any valid documents, the officer shall determine the amount of tax payable, as if such goods have been supplied by the registered person.
In any documents or books of accounts belonging to the registered person are found at any premises other than those mentioned in the certificate of registration, they shall be presumed to be maintained by the said registered person.
Every registered person shall produce the books of accounts which he is required to maintain under any law for the time being in force.
Documents shall be maintained at:
Documents shall be kept and maintained at the registered place of business, as specified in Registration certificate. However, incase, where there are more than one place of business in the certificate of registration, the accounts relating to each such place of business shall be maintained.
Moreover, the documents may be kept and maintained in electronic form and the record so maintained electronically shall be authenticated by means of

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

ICES Advisory 11/2018 (Budget Changes) – Implementation of revised Assessable value for IGST & GST Cess calculation
23/2018 Dated:- 2-4-2018 Trade Notice
Customs
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
CHENNAI VIII (GENERAL)
CUSTOM HOUSE, NO.60 RAJAJI SALAI, CHENNAI – 600 001
Telephone: 25254444 – FAX: 25224622
www. chennaicustoms. gov. in
F.No.S.Misc.09/2018 Sys Unit
Dated: 02/04/2018
PUBLIC NOTICE. 23/2018
Sub: ICES Advisory 11/2018 (Budget Changes) – Implementation of revised Assessable value for IGST & GST Cess calculation Reg.
***********
Kind reference of Importers/ Customs Brokers is invited to amendments introduced in Finance Bi 1,2018 to introduce new sections 3(8A) and 3(10A) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 to determ

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

se may be and the sale price declared above and calculate the IGST 8s GST Compensation cess accordingly.
4. As the President has given assent to the Finance Bill 2018, the above change would be effective from 29.03.2018. Hence, Importers/ Customs Brokers are hereby requested to submit the Ex-Bond BE with proper code as mentioned above in the RSP table in the case of goods sold to other person during the period of warehousing.
5. The above procedure may be followed carefully and difficulties, of any, may be brought to the notice of Joint Commissioner (Systems) by email to (Authority: Finance Bill 2018 and ICES Advisory 11/2018( Budget Changes) – Implementation of revised Assessable value for IGST & GST Cess calculation
(Dr. ANIL K. NIGAM)

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

Singh Tyres Versus State of U.P. And Another
GST
2018 (10) TMI 1236 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (17) G. S. T. L. 377 (All.)
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 2-4-2018
WRIT TAX No. – 552 of 2018
GST
Mr Krishna Murari And Mr Ashok Kumar, JJ.
For The Petitioner : Amit Mahajan, Niraj Kumar Singh
For The Respondent : C.S.C.
ORDER
Heard Sri Amit Mahajan and Sri Niraj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned Special counsel for the State respondents.
The petitioner is a registered proprietorship firm and is engaged in trading of various kind of tyres and tubes. The petitioner has purchased tyres and tubes from Apollo Tyres Ltd., Kanpur (U.P.).
The claim of the petitioner is that

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

pted the goods on 27.03.2018 and has issued a notice/detention memo under Section 129(1) of the Act. In the said notice while mentioning the date respondent no. 2 has also mentioned time being 7-30 a.m.
The petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent no. 2 on 28.03.2018 at 11-00 a.m. in his office. According to the petitioner, he was not aware about the requirement of E-Way Bill for the purposes of transportation of goods from one place to another place within the State of U.P..
The claim of the petitioner is that he has down loaded the EWay Bill on 27.03.2018 from the official department portal. The said E-Way Bill has been down loaded on 27.03.2018 at 9-39 p.m. The claim of the petitioner is that the said E-Way Bill has been

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =

he relevant documents on 28.03.2018, whereas the order has been passed on a day before the date allowed by the respondent no. 2. We have also noticed that while passing the impugned order dated 27.03.2018 no time has been mentioned by the respondent no. 2 whereas while issuing notice/detention memo he has specifically mentioned the time. This clearly goes to show the ill intention on the part of the respondent no. 2.
From perusal of the record, we find that the goods were transported from one place to another within the State of U.P. and were accompanied by the requisite documents and requisite E-Way Bill has also been produced by the petitioner before the respondent no. 2 before the date fixed for reply. In view of the aforesaid fact, we

= = = = = = = =

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

= = = = = = = =