News Update

Nexus between Election Manifesto and Budget 2024 in July!Clearing the Air: Airtel's SC Decision provides clarity on test of AgencyGST implications for Corporate Debtor under IBCI-T- Petitioner's CIBIL score lowered due to same PAN being issued to another assessee who defaulted on loan; I-T Deptt to inform CIBIL of remedial measures taken: HCBrazil’s proposal to tax super-rich globally finds many takers in G20 GroupI-T- Additions framed on account of unconfirmed cash loans upheld in part, where assessee is unable to discharge onus of proving source of cash deposits : ITATCPM manifesto promising annihilation of all weapons of mass destructions including nuclear, draws flak from Defence MinisterI-T- Registration of trust u/s 12A denied due to inadvertent error by assessee in filing Form 10AB but with wrong selection code; case remanded for reconsideration: ITATBiden favours higher steel tariff on ‘cheating’ China + may up tariff on dominant solar tech suppliersI-T- Enhancement of income is not sustainable if CIT (A) not follow sec 251 and no notice given to assessee of enhancement : ITATUS Poll: Biden trumps Trump in money race by USD 75 mnI-T- Assessee is entitled for depreciation on goodwill arising out of difference between cost of acquisition and net value of assets and liabilities as per book value of CAPL : ITATNetanyahu says Israel to decide how and when to respond to Iran’s aggressionI-T- There is no scope of extrapolation in search assessment based solely on assumptions and surmises in absence of any tangible material qua the relevant assessment year: ITATGoogle slays costs by laying off staffers & shifting roles outside USI-T- Re-assessment cannot be sustained where based on borrowed satisfaction & where conducted in a mechanical manner: ITATHeavy downpours drown Dubai; Airport issues travel advisoryCus - There cannot be an exercise of jurisdiction to injunct invocation of BG, as it is a settled principle of law that bank guarantee constitutes an independent contract between the bank and the party in whose favour BG is furnished: HCHM pledges to make India completely Maoist-freeGST - Except for holding that the taxpayer had availed ITC which is blocked credit u/s 17(5), no reasons are specified - Order set aside and matter remanded: HCMicrosoft to inject USD 1.5 bn in AI Group G42 of UAEGST - Injustice would be caused unless petitioner is provided another opportunity to contest tax demand on merits - Subject to deposit of 10% of demand, matter is remanded: HCCanadian budget proposes more taxes on higher income groups & tax credits for EVsGST - Petitioner has an appellate remedy against the impugned order - As petition was filed within the original period of limitation, it is just and appropriate that petitioner be permitted to present statutory appeal: HCWorld leaders appeal for quick ratification of UN Ocean TreatyGST - Once the notification itself has been declared as ultra vires, applying it would amount to applying an illegal notification: HCUK House debates ban on smokingGST - Transfer of development rights is amenable to GST and cannot be brought within the purview of Entry 5 of Schedule-III: HCGlobal economy to grow at 3.2% in current year and also 2025: IMFGST - Challenge to notification 11/2017-CTR clarifying the aspect of transfer of development rights being attracted to GST/TGST is devoid of merits: HCGreat Barrier Reef in Australia suffers serious bleachingGST - Conclusions were recorded in the assessment order without providing a personal hearing - Order set aside and matter remanded: HCUS to impose fresh sanctions on Iran’s missile programmeCus - Mere fact that Commissioner of Customs has filed an affidavit would not denude an officer, otherwise empowered under the Act/Rules to issue and adjudicate a SCN even though the officer may be below the rank of Commissioner: HCDelhi Police nabs woman for thieving luxury SUVsCus - As wife of appellant has already been penalized for the offence related to importation of BMW M5 Car, no reason found to impose penalty against appellant for same offence: CESTAT
 
ABC of Rule 6 - What is P??

MARCH 3, 2008

By R Raghavendra Rao

THE obligation of the manufacturer of dutiable and exempted goods under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules has always been a matter of dispute. Where the assessees do not maintain separate accounts for the inputs used in exempted goods and dutiable goods, the demands made at the rate 10% on the value of the exempted goods did not stand the judicial scrutiny in cases where the proportionate credit was reversed instead of paying 10%, following the ratio of Supreme Court ruling in Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd (2002-TIOL-41-SC-CX). The latest amendment made to Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules appears to be aimed at giving effect to the Chandrapur Magnet ratio by providing an option to the manufacturers /service providers to reverse the proportionate credit or to pay 10% or 8% on the value of the exempted goods/services, as the case may be. The rule contains several formulae represented by letters of the English alphabet from A to P. For easy understanding,  the letters and what they represent are tabulated as under:

Letter

What it means

A

CENVAT credit attributable to inputs used in or in relation to manufacture of exempted goods in a month

B

Total value of exempted services provided during the preceding financial year.

C

total value of dutiable goods manufactured and removed plus the total value of taxable services provided plus the total value of exempted services provided, during the preceding financial year

D

total CENVAT credit taken on inputs during the month minus A.

E

total value of exempted services provided plus the total value of exempted goods manufactured and removed during the preceding
financial year

F

total value of taxable and exempted services provided and total value of dutiable and exempted goods manufactured and removed, during the preceding financial year

G

total CENVAT credit taken on input services during the month

H

the amount of CENVAT credit attributable to inputs used in or in relation to manufacture of exempted goods in the current financial year.

I

Missing…..????? unintentional???

J

the total value of exempted services provided during the current financial year

K

the total value of dutiable goods manufactured and removed plus the total value of taxable services provided plus the total value of exempted services provided, during the current financial year

L

total CENVAT credit taken on inputs during the current financial year minus H

M

total value of taxable and exempted services provided, and total value of dutiable and exempted goods manufactured and removed, during the current financial year

N

total CENVAT credit taken on input services during the current financial year

O

Missing…..not used

P

Used in the Rule, but not explained what is P….

Upto L, the rule is clear and understandable, but when it comes to M, N and P, there is a mix up in drafting. M,N and P are parallel annual figures for E,F and G which are used for provisionally determining the monthly credit payable on the input services used in exempted goods and services.  Therefore the correct position should be:

M

total value of exempted services provided plus the total value of exempted goods manufactured and removed during the current
financial year

N

total value of taxable and exempted services provided, and total value of dutiable and exempted goods manufactured and removed, during the current financial year

P

Total credit availed on the input services during the current financial year.

The relevant sub-rule 3A(c) reads now as under:

(iii) the amount attributable to input services used in or in relation to manufacture of exempted goods or provision of exempted services = (M/N) multiplied by P, where L denotes total value of exempted services provided plus the total value of exempted goods manufactured and removed during the financial year, M denotes total value of taxable and exempted services provided, and total value of dutiable and exempted goods manufactured and removed, during the financial year, and N denotes total CENVAT credit taken on input services during the financial year;

This should read as:

(iii) the amount attributable to input services used in or in relation to manufacture of exempted goods or provision of exempted services = (M/N) multiplied by P, where M denotes total value of exempted services provided plus the total exempted goods manufactured and removed during the financial year, N denotes total value of taxable and exempted services provided, and total value of dutiable and exempted goods manufactured and removed, during the financial year, and P denotes total CENVAT credit taken on input services during the financial year;

Therefore an immediate amendment is required in the above rule.

Further, there is also a need to have a re-look at D which has been defined as the credit taken on the inputs during the month minus A (credit attributable to the inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods during the month). Since the inputs on which credit is taken during the month are not used completely in the same month, it may be appropriate to define D as total credit attributable to the inputs used in the manufacture of final products during the month minus the credit attributable to the inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods.

The provisional monthly amount payable has to be worked out as under :

1. Inputs used in exempted goods

A

2. Inputs used in exempted services

(B/C)XD

3. Input services used in exempted  goods/services

(E/F)XG

In respect of amount payable on the input services, in case 3 above, G has been defined as the total cenvat credit taken on the input services during the month. In effect, the amount to be reversed will be based on the ratio of the value of the exempted services /goods to the total value of the goods/services. However, sub-rule 5 of Rule 6 provides that full credit is allowed on certain common services used notwithstanding the sub-rules 1,2 and 3. Now, these amounts will also have to be included for arriving at G above, which means that the full credit allowed under sub-rule 5 on common services will also be divided now in the ratio of E/F. Therefore the formula in third case is in direct conflict with sub-rule 5 and G may have to be redefined.

(All See related analysis - Rule 6 Calculus)

(The views expressed by the author are personal)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.




Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.