News Update

Call drops - Problem is mostly indoors, says DoTACES fails again; CBEC feels compelled to extend ST Return filing date to April 30PM reviews performance of key infrastructure sectorsCX/CUS/ST - To prefer an appeal before Tribunal, appellant needs to deposit 10% of amount of duty/penalty irrespective of amounts equivalent to 7.5% deposited by them before Commr.(A): LBFM clarifies Union Govt has no plan to levy income tax on agri incomeST - If contention of department is accepted that appellant cannot be treated as service provider then payment made should not be treated as that of service tax but as reversal of CENVAT credit availed - Appeals allowed: CESTATSwachh Bharat Bug Finally Catches Up With CBDTCBDT clarifies rent from letting out of space with amenities in SEZ to be treated as business incomeGujarat goes for massive bureaucratic reshuffle - 45 IAS officers transferredHigh Seas Sales in GST RegimeExpenditure tax - Composite charges collected by hotel can be quantified only upon conclusion of stay of guests: HCCus Appellants were bonafide transferee of DEPB scrip with no involvement in the forgery or fraud before DGFT no penalty imposable ROM allowed: CESTATST Maintenance of software cannot be taxed under 'Management, maintenance or repair service' prior to 01.06.2007: CESTATPension Regulator makes it online for retirement advisersCBI nabs several Plant Quarantine officials + CHAs & Shipping Agents in corruption casee-PRAN card launched for Atal Pension YojanaSitharaman to inaugurate Spices Farmers Producer CompaniesCyber Crime - INTERPOL detects 9000 C2 servers; websites infected with malware codeRental income from space equipped with ameniteis in SEZ to be treated as business incomeCBDT prescribes method for valuation of FMV of assets owned by Trusts / InstitutionsGovt eases PF rules to allow withdrawal for house purchaseIf Govt grants waiver of loan to farmers, it may cost 2% of GDP: Arvind SubramanianCX - Exemption - Sec 11C Notification - Court cannot direct Government to grant exemption - No violation of Article 14: SCGST Network to provide standard software for small tradersClearance of Gift and Personal Use parcels imported through Courier modeST - Tribunal ordering appellant to pay further sum is bereft of any rationale as substantial part of demand stood deposited: HCI-T - Special limitation imposed on EOU for claiming deductions, by way of insertion of Sec 80A(5) and Fourth proviso to Sec 10B(1), is not violative of Constitution of India: HCCX - Activity of assembling various computer components into working system not manufacture: CESTATMinto Road Govt Press to be 'reborn' at cost of Rs 339 Crore
 
Banks, FIs and NBFCs Rule 6 of CCR adapts

FEBRUARY 29, 2016

By Jigar Doshi & Sunny Kachalia, SKP Business Consulting LLP

BUDGET 2016 aimed at rationalising the tax provisions with key focus on amending ambiguous provisions, provide assesse-friendly approach, rationalise the rates of Excise and Customs duty to boost domestic manufacturing, focus of clearing matters pending with Tribunals, etc. As regards Banks,FIs and NBFCs changes are proposed in Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR) to redefine admissibility of credits.

An important change under CCR is with regard to Rule 6 which is revamped and replaced with new set of Rules, which would determine admissibility of credits in case the manufacturer/service provider is manufacturing exempt goods/providing exempt services. With regard to the business of Banks, FIs and NBFCs, it would be pertinent to refer Rule 6(3B) of CCR which deals with admissibility of credit for services provided by way of extending loans, deposits or advances.

The provisions which stand as of now is reproduced as below:

Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (1), (2) and (3), a banking company and a financial institution including a non-banking financial company, engaged in providing services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances, shall pay for every month an amount equal to fifty per cent. of the CENVAT credit availed on inputs and input services in that month.

From the above it would be important to note that provisions dealing with claiming proportionate credit, reversing credit at 7% is not applicable (due to notwithstanding clause) to Banks, FIs and NBFCs and Banks, FIs and NBFCs are required to reverse 50% of their credit. Though there are ambiguities whether the said provision will apply only towards income earned out of services provided of extending deposits, etc or for the entire businesses (income streams) of the Banks, FIs and NBFCs.

Proposed Rule 6(3B) is reproduced as below:

A banking company and a financial institution including a non-banking financial company, engaged in providing services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances, in addition to options given in sub-rules (1), (2) and (3), shall have the option to pay for every month an amount equal to fifty per cent. of the CENVAT credit availed on inputs and input services in that month.

(Effective from 1 st April 2016)

The said change would now require Banks, FIs and NBFCs to ascertain the admissibility of creditsin light of Rule 6(1), (2) and (3) of CCR or reverse 50% of the credit as per revised Rule 6 (3B). Rule 6(1), (2) and (3) of CCR are completely revamped to rationalise admissibility of credits for taxable services and have also defined the sequence for reversal of credits. The said change would give an opportunity to optimise credits for Banks, FIs and NBFCs.

Further, it would be important to note that Rule 6(3B) (present and proposed) is applicable only to Banks, FIs and NBFCs providing services by way of extending loans, deposits and advances.

Considering the amendments, it is imperative that Banks, FIs and NBFCs evaluates the entire Cenvat credit considering the net credit which can be claimed. Separately, they must also analyse the income streams to ascertain which can fall within the purview of services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances; or which can be regarded as exempt/non-taxable under Service Tax. Separately, Asset Reconstruction Companies (ARCs) which are engaged in procuring Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) and servicing them as per the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002 need to ascertain how the change would impact their credits considering the overall income, i.e. income which can be regarded as taxable/exempt.

(DISCLAIMER : The views expressed are strictly of the author and Taxindiaonline.com doesn't necessarily subscribe to the same. Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. is not responsible or liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any interpretation, error, omission in the articles being hosted on the sites)

 


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Explanation 3 How to be interpreted for banks etc

The move to do away with restricting the credit to 50 per cent notwithstanding any other rule, and replacing it as an additional option to banks etc, is indeed welcome. However, as The new Explanation 3 to sub rule 1 of Rule 6 deems any activity which is not even as service as exempted service, would it not create an illogical scenario for banks and lenders where Loans and deposits received or given, being transactions in money, also get covered under exempted service. If that becomes the case, wouldnt banks lose more than 50 per cent of the credit they were enjoying till date. Clarity on the inclusion of Explanation 3 from CBEC would be required as to how it is to be interpreted.


Posted by Unnikrishnan Mohan