Loading...

More Judgements

2019-VIL-503-GUJ  | High Court SGST

GST – Section 129 - Validity of order of detention in the absence of uploading of Form GST MOV-03 and Form GST MOV-04 on the GST portal – HELD - The Circular No.41/15/2018-GST dated 13.4.2018 issued by the CBIC provides that within a period of three working days from the date of issue of the order in FORM GST MOV-02, the proper officer shall conclude the inspection proceedings and on completion of the physical inspection, the proper officer shall prepare a report of such physical verification in FORM GST MOV-04. The Circular also provides that the proper officer shall also record on the common portal, the final report ... [Read more]

GST – Section 129 - Validity of order of detention in the absence of uploading of Form GST MOV-03 and Form GST MOV-04 on the GST portal – HELD - The Circular No.41/15/2018-GST dated 13.4.2018 issued by the CBIC provides that within a period of three working days from the date of issue of the order in FORM GST MOV-02, the proper officer shall conclude the inspection proceedings and on completion of the physical inspection, the proper officer shall prepare a report of such physical verification in FORM GST MOV-04. The Circular also provides that the proper officer shall also record on the common portal, the final report of inspection in Part B of FORM GST-EWB-03 within three days of such physical inspection. In the present case, no report of such physical verification in FORM GST MOV-04 has been served upon the petitioner nor has the final report of inspection been recorded on the common portal. Under the circumstances, the order of detention under section 129 of the CGST Act, prima facie, is not sustainable - By way of interim relief, the respondents are directed to forthwith release the conveyance in question together with the goods contained therein [Read less]

2019-VIL-298-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST – Maharashtra AAR - Whether the work for ‘Operating Citizen Facilitation Centre (CFC) for MCGM on per transaction/receipt basis’ is exempt from GST vide Sr. No.3 & 3A of Notification No. 12/2017 - Central (Rate) as amended – HELD – The contract nowhere specifies separately for supply of goods, namely, computers, other consumables, etc. Therefore, the computers, other consumables, etc are being used by the applicant on their own account and that too for the purpose of providing services for the work of Operating Citizen Facilitation Centres / Collection Centres at various Locations of MCGM. Hence, applicant su... [Read more]

GST – Maharashtra AAR - Whether the work for ‘Operating Citizen Facilitation Centre (CFC) for MCGM on per transaction/receipt basis’ is exempt from GST vide Sr. No.3 & 3A of Notification No. 12/2017 - Central (Rate) as amended – HELD – The contract nowhere specifies separately for supply of goods, namely, computers, other consumables, etc. Therefore, the computers, other consumables, etc are being used by the applicant on their own account and that too for the purpose of providing services for the work of Operating Citizen Facilitation Centres / Collection Centres at various Locations of MCGM. Hence, applicant supply is of services only and are in the nature of pure services - The role of the applicant starts only after the supply of goods/services are rendered by MCGM and hence it cannot be said that they are rendering service by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution - Since the supply in the subject case is in the nature of pure services, in such a case provisions of Sr. No. 3A of Notification No. 12/2017 - Central (Rate) as amended, will not be applicable [Read less]

2019-VIL-299-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST – Maharashtra AAR - Whether the amount collected by applicant-club towards convenience of members and pooled together for paying meeting and communication expenses, RI per capita dues, subscription fees magazine, district per capita assessment and the same is deposited in single bank account, can be considered as supply of goods or services to its Members and liable to GST – HELD - only membership fee recovered by applicant from their members, spent towards incurring various administrative expenses will be exempted from GST - The said transaction by the applicant to its members is a supply of goods/services and is ... [Read more]

GST – Maharashtra AAR - Whether the amount collected by applicant-club towards convenience of members and pooled together for paying meeting and communication expenses, RI per capita dues, subscription fees magazine, district per capita assessment and the same is deposited in single bank account, can be considered as supply of goods or services to its Members and liable to GST – HELD - only membership fee recovered by applicant from their members, spent towards incurring various administrative expenses will be exempted from GST - The said transaction by the applicant to its members is a supply of goods/services and is liable to GST [Read less]

2019-VIL-300-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

VIJAY BABURAO SHIRKE: 04.10.2019 - GST – Maharashtra AAR - Whether receipt of prize money from horse race conducting entities, in the event horse owned by the applicant wins the race, would amount to 'supply under section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 and liable to GST – HELD - The amount of prize money received from the events conducting entities would be covered under 'supply under section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 and consequently, it is held as taxable supply of services and liable to GST @ 18%

2019-VIL-640-CESTAT-BLR-ST  | CESTAT SERVICE TAX

Service Tax - Cenvat Credit - Outdoor Catering Service is not eligible for input service credit post amendment dated 01.04.2011. Therefore, Commissioner has rightly denied the credit on Catering Service. As far as cenvat credit on Transportation of Employees is concerned, this falls under the definition of ‘input service’ as it is directly related to the productivity of the employees working with the appellant and this facility is only from the factory to the residence of the employees and back which falls in the definition of ‘input service’ and the exclusion clause is not applicable as far as this service is conc... [Read more]

Service Tax - Cenvat Credit - Outdoor Catering Service is not eligible for input service credit post amendment dated 01.04.2011. Therefore, Commissioner has rightly denied the credit on Catering Service. As far as cenvat credit on Transportation of Employees is concerned, this falls under the definition of ‘input service’ as it is directly related to the productivity of the employees working with the appellant and this facility is only from the factory to the residence of the employees and back which falls in the definition of ‘input service’ and the exclusion clause is not applicable as far as this service is concerned. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to cenvat credit of service tax on Transportation of Employees service - the appellants are not entitled to cenvat credit of service tax paid on Group Medical Insurance Service - the issue involved in the present case relates to interpretation of the definition of ‘input service’ and therefore extended period cannot be invoked and penalties cannot be imposed – the appeal is partly allowed [Read less]

2019-VIL-296-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST – Maharashtra AAR - The Applicant offers optional Parental Mediclaim insurance for employees' parents. As per this scheme, the Applicant initially pays the entire premium and 50% of the premium is recovered from the respective employees who opt for parental insurance scheme - Whether recovery of 50% of Parental Health Insurance Premium from employees, amounts to supply of service under Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 and whether GST is payable on recovery of 50% of the insurance premium from the salary of the employees – HELD – the activity of recovery of 50% of the cost of insurance premium cannot be treated as ... [Read more]

GST – Maharashtra AAR - The Applicant offers optional Parental Mediclaim insurance for employees' parents. As per this scheme, the Applicant initially pays the entire premium and 50% of the premium is recovered from the respective employees who opt for parental insurance scheme - Whether recovery of 50% of Parental Health Insurance Premium from employees, amounts to supply of service under Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 and whether GST is payable on recovery of 50% of the insurance premium from the salary of the employees – HELD – the activity of recovery of 50% of the cost of insurance premium cannot be treated as an activity done in the course of business or for the furtherance of business - the activity undertaken by the applicant of providing mediclaim policy for the employees' parent through insurance company neither satisfies conditions of section 7 to be held as “supply of service” nor it is covered under the term “business” of section 2(17) of CGST Act 2017. Hence, the applicant is not rendering any services of health insurance to their employees' parent and hence there is no supply of services in the instant case of transaction between employer and employee [Read less]

2019-VIL-297-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST – Maharashtra AAR – Works Contract, Composite Supply - Whether the contract entered into with DMRC by the applicant for supply, erection, installation, commissioning and testing of UPS system qualifies as a supply of works contract under Section 2(119) of the CGST Act - If yes, whether such supply made to DMRC would be taxable at the rate of 12% in terms of Sr. no. 3(v) of Notification No. 11/2017 - C.T. (Rate), as amended w.e.f. 25.1.2018 – HELD – the contract for supply of UPS system to DMRC does not qualify as a 'works contract' under Section 2(119) of the CGST Act since the installed UPS system cannot be sa... [Read more]

GST – Maharashtra AAR – Works Contract, Composite Supply - Whether the contract entered into with DMRC by the applicant for supply, erection, installation, commissioning and testing of UPS system qualifies as a supply of works contract under Section 2(119) of the CGST Act - If yes, whether such supply made to DMRC would be taxable at the rate of 12% in terms of Sr. no. 3(v) of Notification No. 11/2017 - C.T. (Rate), as amended w.e.f. 25.1.2018 – HELD – the contract for supply of UPS system to DMRC does not qualify as a 'works contract' under Section 2(119) of the CGST Act since the installed UPS system cannot be said to result in the emergence of an immovable property - in the contract the major part of the contract is supply of goods. i.e. UPS Units, etc. These goods are delivered to the client by the applicant and such goods that are supplied are used by the applicant to provide services of installation, testing, and commissioning of the substations – the goods and services are supplied as a combination and in conjunction and in the course of their business where the principal supply is supply of goods. Therefore, there is a Composite Supply in the subject case - The principal goods in the subject case is UPS units which are most important for the applicant to render supply as per the contract - UPS is classified under Heading 8504 and attracts GST @18% as supply of goods. Hence the principal supply in their composite supply being goods as described under heading 8504, the applicant is liable to pay GST on the whole contract @ 18% [Read less]

2019-VIL-644-CESTAT-DEL-CU  | CESTAT Case CUSTOMS

Customs – appellant aggrieved by inclusion of the “ship demurrage charges” in the assessable value – HELD – the Section 14 of the Customs Act was amended vide Finance Act, 2007 with effect from 10/10/2007 to include the cost of transportation to the place of importation, there was no reference to the inclusion of demurrage charges as sought to be included by Explanation 2 Rule 10(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules - The demurrage has not been included as a part of cost envisaged by the legislation. Further, demurrage charges are the post importation expenses and it is a kind of penalty. Therefore, it could not hav... [Read more]

Customs – appellant aggrieved by inclusion of the “ship demurrage charges” in the assessable value – HELD – the Section 14 of the Customs Act was amended vide Finance Act, 2007 with effect from 10/10/2007 to include the cost of transportation to the place of importation, there was no reference to the inclusion of demurrage charges as sought to be included by Explanation 2 Rule 10(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules - The demurrage has not been included as a part of cost envisaged by the legislation. Further, demurrage charges are the post importation expenses and it is a kind of penalty. Therefore, it could not have been envisaged by the legislation to be included in the definition of Section 14 of the Act - the impugned order is set aside by allowing the assessee appeal [Read less]

2019-VIL-502-GUJ  | High Court SGST

GST - It is the case of the petitioner that when the goods were being transported, the original invoice along with the e-way bill were there with the goods but while changing the conveyance and shifting the goods to two different conveyances, inadvertently a photocopy of the e-way bill and invoice was not given to the driver of the mini cargo in which parcels were shifted – petitioner indicated willingness to pay tax and penalty as leviable under sub-section (c) of section 129 of the CGST Act and requested the respondent to release the conveyance along with the goods. Since the respondent did not release the goods or the... [Read more]

GST - It is the case of the petitioner that when the goods were being transported, the original invoice along with the e-way bill were there with the goods but while changing the conveyance and shifting the goods to two different conveyances, inadvertently a photocopy of the e-way bill and invoice was not given to the driver of the mini cargo in which parcels were shifted – petitioner indicated willingness to pay tax and penalty as leviable under sub-section (c) of section 129 of the CGST Act and requested the respondent to release the conveyance along with the goods. Since the respondent did not release the goods or the conveyance, the petitioner has approached the court seeking relief – HELD - Having regard to the fact that the proceedings under section 130 of the CGST Act are still pending before the respondent, the interest of justice would be served if the second respondent is directed to forthwith release the goods as well as the conveyance upon the petitioner paying the tax and penalty under protest which shall be subject to the final outcome of the proceedings under section 130 of the CGST Act without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the same in case the same is adverse to the petitioner - the petition is partly allowed [Read less]

2019-VIL-645-CESTAT-DEL-ST  | CESTAT SERVICE TAX

Service Tax – appellant availed Cenvat Credit on the invoices not issued in its own name, but in the name of parent company at Singapore - Whether the invoice based upon which the appellants have availed cenvat credit are proper documents or not - Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules – HELD - The use of word “shall” in Rule 9 (1) makes the provision mandatory and it becomes clear that to avail cenvat credit mandatorily the documents as mentioned therein with such particulars as mentioned shall be furnished. In the present case the appellant has placed the invoice for availing the cenvat credit, however, the invoice is... [Read more]

Service Tax – appellant availed Cenvat Credit on the invoices not issued in its own name, but in the name of parent company at Singapore - Whether the invoice based upon which the appellants have availed cenvat credit are proper documents or not - Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules – HELD - The use of word “shall” in Rule 9 (1) makes the provision mandatory and it becomes clear that to avail cenvat credit mandatorily the documents as mentioned therein with such particulars as mentioned shall be furnished. In the present case the appellant has placed the invoice for availing the cenvat credit, however, the invoice is not issued in the name of the appellant, but in the parent company at Singapore - The person, who is named in the invoice can only avail the cenvat credit, as per the said rule. Rule 9 (b) itself speaks about the supplementary invoices. The appellant could have invoked the said rule. In absence thereof the statutory mandate in rule 9 cannot be overlooked in view of the oral defences of the appellant - even the argument that the substantial benefit cannot be denied due to mere procedural lapse is not sustainable to extend any benefit to the appellant - The Department is entitled to invoke the extended period of limitation. The present case is not the case of mere procedural lapse but of intentional manual change in invoice - no infirmity in the order under challenge and same is upheld and appeal stands dismissed [Read less]

2019-VIL-642-CESTAT-CHE-ST  | CESTAT SERVICE TAX

Service Tax - Whether Customer Care Service has direct nexus with the final products - Cenvat Credit on input services which are in the nature of sales promotion service / customer care service – Department of the view that there is no express warranty offered by appellant for goods at the time of sales and therefore services availed for customer care are in the nature of after sales activity – HELD - Every manufacturer is liable for the inherent manufacturing defect of the product. It is not only in cases where express warranty is offered that the manufacturer is liable for the defects, as argued by the department. Ev... [Read more]

Service Tax - Whether Customer Care Service has direct nexus with the final products - Cenvat Credit on input services which are in the nature of sales promotion service / customer care service – Department of the view that there is no express warranty offered by appellant for goods at the time of sales and therefore services availed for customer care are in the nature of after sales activity – HELD - Every manufacturer is liable for the inherent manufacturing defect of the product. It is not only in cases where express warranty is offered that the manufacturer is liable for the defects, as argued by the department. Every product has an implied warranty that it will satisfy the specification as mentioned and also that it will conform to certain standard in regard to the consideration paid. Thus, a manufacturer is liable for the defect of the product even though there is no express warranty offered - the provisions in Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 has provided that every packaged commodity shall declare the name of the manufacturer, date of manufacture and such other details along with the customer help line number / address also should be provided on the packaged commodity. This being so, the manufacturer has to maintain the customer sales / help line / cell for redressing the customer’s grievances. Indeed, the manufacturer being liable for the manufacturing defect of the product, the activity is in relation to manufacture. Such customer care services help in augmenting the sales and therefore is closely related with the sales promotion also. The finding of the authorities below that customer care service does not have direct nexus with the final products, is legally incorrect - the credit availed in respect of sales promotion service / customer care services are legal and proper. The impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed [Read less]

2019-VIL-636-CESTAT-AHM-CE  | CESTAT CENTRAL EXCISE

Central Excise – allegation of clandestine removal – revenue seeking to deny the benefit of cum duty – HELD - the hard disk from where the computer printout was taken needs to be examined, which will show that whether the data is relevant or it is for the purpose of training as claimed by the appellant. The issue of production capacity vis a vis Electricity consumption also to be examined properly. On these issues proper consideration is required, therefore, the matters are remanded to the adjudicating authority for passing a fresh order - the benefit of cum duty is governed by Statutory Provision with regard to valu... [Read more]

Central Excise – allegation of clandestine removal – revenue seeking to deny the benefit of cum duty – HELD - the hard disk from where the computer printout was taken needs to be examined, which will show that whether the data is relevant or it is for the purpose of training as claimed by the appellant. The issue of production capacity vis a vis Electricity consumption also to be examined properly. On these issues proper consideration is required, therefore, the matters are remanded to the adjudicating authority for passing a fresh order - the benefit of cum duty is governed by Statutory Provision with regard to valuation of excisable goods in terms of Section 4 of CEA, 1944. Merely because the goods were allegedly cleared clandestinely, Section 4 cannot be applied differently. As regard the doubt raised on the valuation of the goods, on one hand the SCN has conclusively arrived at transaction value which is final. There after no question can be raised by the revenue on the value ascertained and duty was computed on such values in the show cause notice. Therefore, the Ld. Adjudicating authority has rightly and legally extended the benefit of cum duty price which we uphold - the revenues appeals are dismissed, parties’ appeals are remanded to the Adjudicating Authority [Read less]

2019-VIL-643-CESTAT-DEL-CE  | CESTAT CENTRAL EXCISE

Central Excise - Department case that the credit availed by the appellant on travel by Chartered Plane, regular flight and hire taxi do not have any nexus with the manufacture of finished and are not an input service and the appellant are not entitled to the benefit of credit and have wrongly availed it, culminating in the issuance of Show Cause Notice proposing to deny the credit along with imposition of penalty and recovery of interest invoking extended period – HELD - the Director, Senior Executive and employees / Engineers due to exigency of business, have to travel at short notice to sustain the manufacturing activi... [Read more]

Central Excise - Department case that the credit availed by the appellant on travel by Chartered Plane, regular flight and hire taxi do not have any nexus with the manufacture of finished and are not an input service and the appellant are not entitled to the benefit of credit and have wrongly availed it, culminating in the issuance of Show Cause Notice proposing to deny the credit along with imposition of penalty and recovery of interest invoking extended period – HELD - the Director, Senior Executive and employees / Engineers due to exigency of business, have to travel at short notice to sustain the manufacturing activity and also improve the business and profitability. Thus, travel is an essential part related to manufacture and clearance of dutiable final products - the show cause notice is issued pursuant to audit and issue of audit report. Admittedly, the transactions are properly backed by invoices and recorded in the ordinary course of business. Admittedly, the statutory returns have been regularly filed. There is no case of misdeclaration in the returns. Thus, in the absence of conditions like suppression of facts or contumacious conduct, extended period of limitation is not available to Revenue - the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside [Read less]

2019-VIL-641-CESTAT-CHE-CU  | CESTAT Case CUSTOMS

Customs – Refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid if the imported goods which were sold on payment of VAT – rejection of refund claims as the appellants filed the refund claims after the period of one year – interpretation of exemption notification - HELD – the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Sony India case has taken a liberal view on interpreting the exemption notification and held that refund is available without the limitation of one year indicated in the exemption Notification 102/97 after amendment. On the other hand, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has constructed the exemption notification strictly an... [Read more]

Customs – Refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid if the imported goods which were sold on payment of VAT – rejection of refund claims as the appellants filed the refund claims after the period of one year – interpretation of exemption notification - HELD – the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Sony India case has taken a liberal view on interpreting the exemption notification and held that refund is available without the limitation of one year indicated in the exemption Notification 102/97 after amendment. On the other hand, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has constructed the exemption notification strictly and held that all conditions including the time limit within which the refund claim has to be filed must be fulfilled. We also find that there is no order of the jurisdictional High Court of Madras. However, the question of strict versus liberal interpretations of the exemption notifications has now finally been settled by the judgment of the Constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dilip Kumar & Company, any exemption notification must be strictly interpreted and any benefit of doubt must go in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Consequently, the refund applications of the importer beyond the time limit have been correctly rejected by the lower authorities. The impugned orders rejecting such refund claims are correct in law and call for no interference. The appeals are rejected and impugned orders are upheld [Read less]

2019-VIL-499-MAD-CE  | High Court CENTRAL EXCISE

Central Excise - Duty demand on transformer structural materials, otherwise known as tower parts and structure part which consists of clamps, different types of channel cross arms, stay set and transformer structure special clamps cleared as non-excisable goods – whether processing of structural materials out of MS angles amounts to manufacture – HELD - In connection with payment of duty for line materials, tower parts and structural parts pertaining to the order in original for the period 1993-94, the Department had accepted that there was no manufacturing activity and as the consequence, refunded the duty pay. In oth... [Read more]

Central Excise - Duty demand on transformer structural materials, otherwise known as tower parts and structure part which consists of clamps, different types of channel cross arms, stay set and transformer structure special clamps cleared as non-excisable goods – whether processing of structural materials out of MS angles amounts to manufacture – HELD - In connection with payment of duty for line materials, tower parts and structural parts pertaining to the order in original for the period 1993-94, the Department had accepted that there was no manufacturing activity and as the consequence, refunded the duty pay. In other words, the Department had accepted the petitioner's stand till the year 2008 that there was no manufacturing activity and in the present impugned order in original, a contrary stand has been taken that the activities of the petitioner is a manufacturing activity and is a taxable commodity - When the CESTAT has already held that the petitioner's activities involved in the present Writ Petition to be a non-manufacturing activity and such a ratio has already been upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the present impugned order, passed on the basis that the petitioner's activity is a manufacturing activity, cannot be sustained - the Order on the file of the respondent is quashed and the Writ Petition stands allowed [Read less]

2019-VIL-313-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

M/s MANIPAL TECHNOLOGIES LTD: 16.09.2019 - GST - Karnataka AAR - The Pattadar Passbook cum Title Deed is appropriately classifiable under HSN 4820

2019-VIL-314-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST - Karnataka AAR - If the final printed material is a book or a journal or a periodical and if the materials on which the printing is done are provided by the customers, then the activity would be covered under entry 26(i)(d) and would be liable to tax at 2.5% CGST plus 2.5% SGST. But if the final printed material is other than a book or a journal or a periodical but the involves the jobwork of printing of all goods falling under Chapter 48 or 49, which attract CGST @ 6 per cent, then the activity is liable to tax at 6% CGST plus 6% SGST. But, if the jobwork of printing made on the materials belonging to other is not co... [Read more]

GST - Karnataka AAR - If the final printed material is a book or a journal or a periodical and if the materials on which the printing is done are provided by the customers, then the activity would be covered under entry 26(i)(d) and would be liable to tax at 2.5% CGST plus 2.5% SGST. But if the final printed material is other than a book or a journal or a periodical but the involves the jobwork of printing of all goods falling under Chapter 48 or 49, which attract CGST @ 6 per cent, then the activity is liable to tax at 6% CGST plus 6% SGST. But, if the jobwork of printing made on the materials belonging to other is not covered by the above two items, then the same is liable to be covered under Entry No. 26(iii) and is liable to tax at 9% CGST plus 9% SGST [Read less]

2019-VIL-315-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

M/s CARNATION HOTELS PVT LTD: 16.09.2019 - GST - Karnataka AAR - The accommodation service proposed to be rendered by the applicant to SEZ units are covered under the IGST as it is an inter-State supply as per section 7(5)(b) of the Integrated Goods and Services Act, 2017 - Since the accommodation service supplied to an SEZ are covered under IGST Act, the same can be treated as zero rated supplies and the invoice can be raised without charging Tax after executing LUT under section 16

2019-VIL-316-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST - Karnataka AAR - The services provided by the applicant to the Bangalore Development Authority in relation to the construction of two housing complexes referred to in the application are covered under entry no.3(vi)(a) of Notification No.11/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 (as amended) and is liable to tax at 6% under the CGST Act, 2017 - The activity undertaken by the applicant as enumerated in the application is covered under section 2(119) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act and is a works contract services - Bangalore Development Authority is a Government Entity as per the provisions of the GST Law ... [Read more]

GST - Karnataka AAR - The services provided by the applicant to the Bangalore Development Authority in relation to the construction of two housing complexes referred to in the application are covered under entry no.3(vi)(a) of Notification No.11/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 (as amended) and is liable to tax at 6% under the CGST Act, 2017 - The activity undertaken by the applicant as enumerated in the application is covered under section 2(119) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act and is a works contract services - Bangalore Development Authority is a Government Entity as per the provisions of the GST Law - The transaction of the applicant would be a supply of works contract services covered under clause (a) of entry no.3(vi) of the Notification No.11/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 (as amended) and not under entry no. 3(ii) or 3(iv) or 3(v) of the said notification [Read less]

2019-VIL-301-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST – Karnataka AAR - whether the Portfolio Management services being provided to the non-resident Indian clients are taxable to GST – applicant claim that since the place of supply is outside India, hence, the supply amounts to export of service and consequently be "zero-rated" – HELD - determination of place of supply is very crucial in the instant case so as to decide whether the provision of said services amount to export of services or not - the applicant's question is related to place of supply and hence it is not a matter on which this authority is empowered to give a ruling and hence the application is reject... [Read more]

GST – Karnataka AAR - whether the Portfolio Management services being provided to the non-resident Indian clients are taxable to GST – applicant claim that since the place of supply is outside India, hence, the supply amounts to export of service and consequently be "zero-rated" – HELD - determination of place of supply is very crucial in the instant case so as to decide whether the provision of said services amount to export of services or not - the applicant's question is related to place of supply and hence it is not a matter on which this authority is empowered to give a ruling and hence the application is rejected [Read less]

2019-VIL-302-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST – Karnataka AAR - Whether the activities carried out in India by the applicant would render the applicant to qualify as an “intermediary” as defined under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act, 2017 and consequently be subject to the levy of GST – HELD - the applicant acted as the conduit, the bridge, the go-getter who facilitated or enabled the sale of their goods to the customers in the taxable territory. The actions of the applicant, therefore, squarely fit into the definition of an intermediary - The activities carried out in India by the applicant so far as those activities mentioned in the "Pre-sale and Marketing... [Read more]

GST – Karnataka AAR - Whether the activities carried out in India by the applicant would render the applicant to qualify as an “intermediary” as defined under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act, 2017 and consequently be subject to the levy of GST – HELD - the applicant acted as the conduit, the bridge, the go-getter who facilitated or enabled the sale of their goods to the customers in the taxable territory. The actions of the applicant, therefore, squarely fit into the definition of an intermediary - The activities carried out in India by the applicant so far as those activities mentioned in the "Pre-sale and Marketing Services Agreement" would render the applicant to qualify as an "intermediary" as defined under Section 2(13) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and consequently be subject to the levy of GST [Read less]

2019-VIL-303-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST – Karnataka AAR - Applicant are in the business of selling Volvo branded trucks and thereafter providing after sale support services, including warranty services for Volvo branded trucks and buses in India - Whether the supplies made by the Applicant to Volvo Sweden is a supply of services and Whether the supplies by the Applicant amounts to export of services to Volvo Sweden and hence zero rated under GST law – HELD – the subject transaction is a transaction within the country and is a composite supply of goods or services to the customers by the applicant and hence does not amount to export of services as M/s V... [Read more]

GST – Karnataka AAR - Applicant are in the business of selling Volvo branded trucks and thereafter providing after sale support services, including warranty services for Volvo branded trucks and buses in India - Whether the supplies made by the Applicant to Volvo Sweden is a supply of services and Whether the supplies by the Applicant amounts to export of services to Volvo Sweden and hence zero rated under GST law – HELD – the subject transaction is a transaction within the country and is a composite supply of goods or services to the customers by the applicant and hence does not amount to export of services as M/s Volvo Sweden is not the recipient of services provided by the applicant, but only pays the consideration to the provider of such services - The applicant is providing composite supply of goods and services to the customers where in the principal supply is that of goods or services depending on the nature of individual case - The transaction is either an intra-State or inter-State transaction but not export transaction - Since this transaction is not an export of services, the transaction is not a "Zero-rated Supply" under the IGST Act [Read less]

2019-VIL-319-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST - Karnataka AAR - Whether Marketing & Pre-Sales Technical Support Services provided by the applicant will be classified as Intermediary services in terms of Section 2(13) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Whether the Post- Sales Technical Support Services provided by the applicant would be classified as Information Technology Support Services falling under HSN Code 998313 – HELD – since the services provided is in providing support to the software supplied earlier, the same amounts to provision of information technology services which is covered under Heading 9983 - Other professional, technical ... [Read more]

GST - Karnataka AAR - Whether Marketing & Pre-Sales Technical Support Services provided by the applicant will be classified as Intermediary services in terms of Section 2(13) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Whether the Post- Sales Technical Support Services provided by the applicant would be classified as Information Technology Support Services falling under HSN Code 998313 – HELD – since the services provided is in providing support to the software supplied earlier, the same amounts to provision of information technology services which is covered under Heading 9983 - Other professional, technical and business services and Group 99831 - Management Consulting and Management Services; Information Technology Services and Service Code 998313 - Information Technology consulting and support services. The explanatory note to the scheme of classification of services also states that 998313 - Information Technology consulting and support services includes the provision of customer support in using or troubleshooting the software, upgrade services and the provision of patches and updates. Hence the services supplied is Information Technology Support Services covered under Service Code 998313 to the end-customer on behalf of the parent company by the applicant and by virtue of the clause (91) of section 2 of the CGST Act, the recipient of such service would be the parent company, as the consideration is receivable from the parent company - The Marketing and Pre-sales Technical Support Services provided by the applicant will be classified as Intermediary services in terms of Section 2(13) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - The Post-Sales Technical Support Services provided by the applicant is classified as Information Technology Support Services falling under Service Code 998313 [Read less]

2019-VIL-304-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST - Karnataka AAR - The applicant, being a commission agent, is required to be registered under Section 22(1) of CGST Act 2017, as they qualify to be an agent in terms of para 3 of Schedule I to the CGST Act 2017 - The services provided by the applicant to the principal are covered under "services provided by a commission agent for sale or purchase of agricultural produce", which are exempted under entry no. 54(g) of the Notification No. 12/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and hence the said Notification is applicable to the Applicant, being the commission agent of APMC, Karnataka. However the supply of dry chi... [Read more]

GST - Karnataka AAR - The applicant, being a commission agent, is required to be registered under Section 22(1) of CGST Act 2017, as they qualify to be an agent in terms of para 3 of Schedule I to the CGST Act 2017 - The services provided by the applicant to the principal are covered under "services provided by a commission agent for sale or purchase of agricultural produce", which are exempted under entry no. 54(g) of the Notification No. 12/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and hence the said Notification is applicable to the Applicant, being the commission agent of APMC, Karnataka. However the supply of dry chilies to the traders under the invoice of the applicant is liable to tax - Dry Chiilies is covered under the definition of agricultural produce, in terms of definition at para 2(d) of the Notification No. 12/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 [Read less]

2019-VIL-305-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST - Karnataka AAR - Whether the value of free of cost supplies by the principal is included in the value of supply by the job worker – HELD - The nature of supply done by the applicant is one composite supply consisting of two supplies - one relating to the manufacturing service on the physical inputs (goods) owned by others (Service Accounting Code 9988) and the other relating to supply of non-critical components, with the former being the principal supply. Hence the entire transaction is to be treated as the supply of manufacturing service on the physical inputs (goods) owned by others (Service Accounting Code 9988) ... [Read more]

GST - Karnataka AAR - Whether the value of free of cost supplies by the principal is included in the value of supply by the job worker – HELD - The nature of supply done by the applicant is one composite supply consisting of two supplies - one relating to the manufacturing service on the physical inputs (goods) owned by others (Service Accounting Code 9988) and the other relating to supply of non-critical components, with the former being the principal supply. Hence the entire transaction is to be treated as the supply of manufacturing service on the physical inputs (goods) owned by others (Service Accounting Code 9988) and is taxable at the rate applicable to the same at 18%; the value of the goods provided by WIPL would not form the part of the value of the supply and must be excluded while valuing the supply [Read less]

2019-VIL-306-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST - Karnataka AAR - Input tax credit on inputs purchased for setting up of the captive power plant - Goods, the value of which has been capitalized in the books of account would not be considered as inputs and the applicant will not be entitled to credit of input tax in relation to such goods. From the list of the goods given in Annexure to the application it cannot be inferred as to where capitalization has been done. Therefore in respect of each and every entry of the annexure specific order cannot be made. Therefore the applicant is entitled to input tax credit in respect of goods other than capital goods. In respect ... [Read more]

GST - Karnataka AAR - Input tax credit on inputs purchased for setting up of the captive power plant - Goods, the value of which has been capitalized in the books of account would not be considered as inputs and the applicant will not be entitled to credit of input tax in relation to such goods. From the list of the goods given in Annexure to the application it cannot be inferred as to where capitalization has been done. Therefore in respect of each and every entry of the annexure specific order cannot be made. Therefore the applicant is entitled to input tax credit in respect of goods other than capital goods. In respect of the second part of the question it is Ruled that only those apparatus, equipment, and machinery which are fixed to earth by foundation or structural support alone arc entitled to qualify as plant and machinery. Therefore the goods answering to this definition alone shall be qualified to be treated as 'plant and machinery'. In respect of other goods provisions of Section 17(5)(c) shall apply and credit of input tax shall not be available - The applicant shall be entitled to the eligible input credits (as decided in question 1) in entirety provided the entire production is captively consumed - The applicant company is required to reverse input tax credit on the unutilized electric energy banked with KPTCL, GESCOM & HESCOM and for which the applicant receives a consideration in terms of the Wheeling and banking agreement [Read less]

2019-VIL-307-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

M/s KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION LIMITED: 12.09.2019 - GST - Karnataka AAR - Whether KMF is liable to deduct GST TDS under section 51 of CGST Act on the payments made to suppliers – HELD - The applicant is not liable to deduct tax at source as per provisions of section 51 of CGST ACT towards payments made to suppliers of taxable goods or services or both, as they are not covered under any of the clauses of Section 51(1) of the CGST/KGST Act 2017

2019-VIL-308-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST - Karnataka AAR - Whether the applicant is eligible to claim the GST Input tax credit on the items purchased for furtherance of business – HELD - In the instant case the applicant offers free foreign / local trips, as incentives, to the dealers / painters etc., without any consideration. Therefore the input tax credit on the services procured (input services), for offering aforesaid services of free trips, is not available to the applicant - The applicant is not eligible to avail input tax credit on the inward supplies of goods and services which are attributable to the incentives provided in the form of gifts of goo... [Read more]

GST - Karnataka AAR - Whether the applicant is eligible to claim the GST Input tax credit on the items purchased for furtherance of business – HELD - In the instant case the applicant offers free foreign / local trips, as incentives, to the dealers / painters etc., without any consideration. Therefore the input tax credit on the services procured (input services), for offering aforesaid services of free trips, is not available to the applicant - The applicant is not eligible to avail input tax credit on the inward supplies of goods and services which are attributable to the incentives provided in the form of gifts of goods and services to the painters and dealers and other persons under the CGST / SGST / IGST Act. [Read less]

2019-VIL-309-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

M/s S.R.K. LADDERS: 12.09.2019 - GST - Karnataka AAR - "Agriculture Tree Climbing Apparatus-Unipole Manually operated Aluminium ladder" is covered under Tariff Heading 820 land is covered under Entry No.137 of Notification No.12/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and hence is exempted

2019-VIL-311-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

M/s SHREE RAJARAJESHWARI & CO.: 12.09.2019 - GST - Karnataka AAR - The goods in question is verified and found that they are in the form of small logs (in the form of billets) and hence cannot be covered under HSN 4401. Hence they are squarely covered under the entry 4403 as clarified in the Circular No.80/54/2018-GST dated 31-12-2018 - the applicant is liable to pay CGST and SGST at the rate of 9 percent each by supply of debarked Eucalyptus, Acacia, Subabul, Casurina, Pine Pulpwood in billets of required size to paper mills vide HSN code 4403

2019-VIL-312-AAR  | Advance Ruling Authority SGST

GST - Karnataka AAR - The supply of goods being food or any other article for human consumption or any drink provided by the applicant under cash and carry model where in the items are prepared in the same premises from where it is supplied is covered under amended entry No. 7(i) of the Notification No. 11/2017 - Central Tax dated 28.06.2017 as amended by Notification No. 13 /2018 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 26-07-2018 - The rate of tax applicable on the above transaction is 2.5% CGST and 2.5% SGST subject to the proviso that credit of input tax charged on goods and services used in supplying the service has not been taken... [Read more]

GST - Karnataka AAR - The supply of goods being food or any other article for human consumption or any drink provided by the applicant under cash and carry model where in the items are prepared in the same premises from where it is supplied is covered under amended entry No. 7(i) of the Notification No. 11/2017 - Central Tax dated 28.06.2017 as amended by Notification No. 13 /2018 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 26-07-2018 - The rate of tax applicable on the above transaction is 2.5% CGST and 2.5% SGST subject to the proviso that credit of input tax charged on goods and services used in supplying the service has not been taken [Read less]

2019-VIL-500-AP  | High Court SGST

GST - Petitioner seeking direction to the respondents to open the GSTN portal and enable petitioner to file the GST TRAN-I - The petitioner tried to file the Form TRAN-I through GST web portal but the system did not allow the petitioner to file the Form GST TRAN-I return by not connecting to the GSTN or by indicating that the ‘due date is over’, though the same was filed within the due date – HELD - the entire GST system is still in a trial and error phase and it will be too much of a burden to place on the Assessee to expect them to comply with the requirement of the law where they are unable to even connect to the ... [Read more]

GST - Petitioner seeking direction to the respondents to open the GSTN portal and enable petitioner to file the GST TRAN-I - The petitioner tried to file the Form TRAN-I through GST web portal but the system did not allow the petitioner to file the Form GST TRAN-I return by not connecting to the GSTN or by indicating that the ‘due date is over’, though the same was filed within the due date – HELD - the entire GST system is still in a trial and error phase and it will be too much of a burden to place on the Assessee to expect them to comply with the requirement of the law where they are unable to even connect to the system on account of network failures or other failures - the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to either open the Portal to enable the petitioner to again file the Form GST TRAN-1 electronically or in the alternative accept the Form GST TRAN-1 presented manually – answered in favour of petitioner [Read less]

2019-VIL-501-AP-ST  | High Court SERVICE TAX

Service Tax - The petitioner did not furnish reply to Show Cause Notice under the bona fide belief that as the basis for the SCN is the audit and it has already submitted a detailed reply to the notice that was issued on the basis of audit objections - Whether Section 78 of the Finance Act was rightly invoked by the Department and penalty was rightly imposed – Demand of service tax with interest and penalty – petitioner aggrieved by dismissal of appeal on the ground of time barred - HELD - The petitioner did not submit objections as objections are already submitted to the audit letter. The impugned order-in-original ha... [Read more]

Service Tax - The petitioner did not furnish reply to Show Cause Notice under the bona fide belief that as the basis for the SCN is the audit and it has already submitted a detailed reply to the notice that was issued on the basis of audit objections - Whether Section 78 of the Finance Act was rightly invoked by the Department and penalty was rightly imposed – Demand of service tax with interest and penalty – petitioner aggrieved by dismissal of appeal on the ground of time barred - HELD - The petitioner did not submit objections as objections are already submitted to the audit letter. The impugned order-in-original has come to be passed by observing that neither at the time of audit nor at the time of personal hearing any representation is made though in fact detailed objections are filed to the audit letter. Thereafter, though the appeal was dismissed on the ground of delay, yet, since the order-in-original was passed without consideration of the objections filed by the petitioner and as the principles of natural justice are violated and injustice has occasioned - in view of the fact that the order-in-original was passed without considering the objections and in violation of the principles of natural justice and as it resulted in failure of justice, the petitioner can assail the order-in-original passed by the respondent and it is not necessary for the petitioner to assail the orders dismissing the appeal as time barred - the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order-in-original is set aside and the matter is remitted to the respondent for consideration and passing orders afresh [Read less]

2019-VIL-460-ORI-CU  | High Court Case CUSTOMS

Customs - petition challenging the “Explanation” to Sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 and prayed to declare it to be ultra vires the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Act 1962 - Includability of demurrage charge to the assessable value of imported goods – HELD - demurrage cannot be included for the purpose of valuation under the Customs Act, 1962 - the contentions raised by the petitioner that the relevant provisions in the Principal Act is silent about the ‘demurrage’; thus, it was beyond the legislative power to include it in the Rules is ... [Read more]

Customs - petition challenging the “Explanation” to Sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 and prayed to declare it to be ultra vires the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Act 1962 - Includability of demurrage charge to the assessable value of imported goods – HELD - demurrage cannot be included for the purpose of valuation under the Customs Act, 1962 - the contentions raised by the petitioner that the relevant provisions in the Principal Act is silent about the ‘demurrage’; thus, it was beyond the legislative power to include it in the Rules is accepted and thus the explanation to Sub Rule-(2) of Rule 10 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 is held to be bad and hence declared ultra vires the Constitution/ provision of Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 - the explanation added to the Rules, 2007 travelling beyond the scope of the Act is bad in law and hence deserves to be declared as ultra vires and hence the same is struck down – answered in favour of petitioner [Read less]

2015-VIL-206-SC-CU  | Supreme Court Case CUSTOMS

As per the appellant, this proviso is not only ultravires Section 14(1) and Section 14(1-A) of the Customs Act, 1962 but is also violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India – HELD – the only justification for stipulating 1% of the F.O.B. value as the cost of loading, unloading and handling charges is that it would help customs authorities to apply the aforesaid rate uniformly. This can be a justification only if the loading, unloading and handling charges are not ascertainable. Where such charges are known and determinable, there is no reason to have such a yardstick - the impugned amendme... [Read more]

As per the appellant, this proviso is not only ultravires Section 14(1) and Section 14(1-A) of the Customs Act, 1962 but is also violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India – HELD – the only justification for stipulating 1% of the F.O.B. value as the cost of loading, unloading and handling charges is that it would help customs authorities to apply the aforesaid rate uniformly. This can be a justification only if the loading, unloading and handling charges are not ascertainable. Where such charges are known and determinable, there is no reason to have such a yardstick - the impugned amendment, namely, proviso (ii) to sub-rule (2) of Rule 9 introduced vide Notification dated 05.07.1990 is unsustainable and bad in law as it exists in the present form and it has to be read down to mean that this clause would apply only when actual charges referred to in Clause (b) are not ascertainable - judgment of the High Court is set aside and the appeals are allowed [Read less]

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page