GST CASE LAWS
AAAR CASE
2019-TIOL-35-AAAR-GST
Triveni Turbine Ltd
GST - The appellant company is a public limited company engaged in manufacture and supply of steam turbine solutions for industrial captive and renewable power - It manufactures steam turbines of up to 100 MW - These turbines also provide renewable power solutions specifically for biomass, sugar & process co-generation, waste-to-energy and district heating - It also provides after-market services to customers - The appellant had approached the AAR seeking to know whether the turbine generator to be supplied by it to the buyer for use in waste-to-energy project is covered under Sr No 234 of Schedule I of Notfn No 01/2017-IGST(R) dated 28.06.2017 as renewable energy devices and parts for the manufacture of waste to energy plants & devices attracting tax @ 5% - The AAR held that such turbines were not classifiable under this particular Serial number - Hence the present appeal.
Held - The turbine generator plays an integral part in the process of converting waste to energy - Hence the supply of the same for a waste to energy plant will be covered under the description of item (e) in Column 3 of Sr No 234 of Schedule I - However, it is emphasized that a turbine per se will be ineligible for concessional rate of 5% GST & will be eligible for the same only if turbine is supplied for setting up the waste to energy plant - Moreover, the turbine generator set comprises of many parts which all function together to perform the function of converting steam to electricity - Hence the same is classifiable under CTH 8406 82 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - It is also seen that the appellant supplied the turbine generator set to a company formed to execute a waste-to-energy project awarded by the State Government - Hence the mandate of CBIC Circular 80/54/2018-GST dated 31.12.2018 - Hence the turbine generator set is eligible for 5% GST as per Sr No 234 of Schedule I of Notfn No 01/2017-IT(R) dated 28.06.2017: AAAR
- Appeal allowed: AAAR
AAR CASES
2019-TIOL-116-AAR-GST
E-Square Leisure Pvt Ltd
GST - The applicant company is engaged in the business of exhibition and business services, accomodation in hotels, inn, guest house, club or camp site & restaurant services - It intends to enter into a contractual agreement of renting of immovable property with the lessee for leasing of the immovable property for rent - Apart from rent, the applicant also plans to collect expenses such as electricity, water charges, property tax and cooking fuel from the lessee - Hence it approached the AAR seeking to know the tax liability on any goods or services or both.
Held - GST would be leviable on the reimbursement of expenses from the lessee buy the lessor at actuals - Moreover, as the reimbursement of expenses constitutes composite supply, GST would be payable at the rate as applicable to the principal supply: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2019-TIOL-115-AAR-GST
Famous Studios Ltd
GST - The applicant is engaged in renting of immovable property to tenants, video tape production & sound recording - It approached the AAR seeking to know whether the exemption from payment of GST on reverse charge basis u/s 9(4) of the CGST or SGST Act for receipt or supply of goods or services from an unregistered person is applicable irrespective of any threshold limit from 01.07.2017 vide Notfn No 8/2017 r/w Notfn No 38/2017 dated 13.10.2017 - Also whether any action for recovery of tax u/s 9(4) of CGST Act or corresponding provision of SGST Act can be initiated if such tax ia not paid from 01.07.2017 to 12.10.2017 within the due dates - Whether interest on delayed payment of CGST or SGST is payable if tax on relevant transactions is put on hold till 30.09.2019 & whether the Circular dated 02.05.2018 will have any effect on taxation including interest on the transaction.
Held - The exemption from payment of GST is inapplicable - The RCM is applicable on the transactions effected w.e.f. 01.07.2017 to 12.10.2017 - The question regarding recovery of tax u/s 9(4) & interest on delayed payment of CGST & SGST and the effect of the relevant Circular, are withdrawn by the applicant: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2019-TIOL-114-AAR-GST
NMDC Ltd
GST - The applicant company is a State-controlled mineral producer, owned by the Government of India and is under the administrative control of the Ministry of Steel - It manufactures Pellets from its plant located in Karnataka & it availed Cenvat credit of taxes paid on input goods & services as per provisions of CCR 2004 - It had availed operation & maintenance services in respect of the plant prior to 01.07.2017 - It approached the AAR seeking to know whether credit of service tax paid on operation & maintenance service received by the applicant in the pre-GST regime could be claimed as ITC u/s 140(5) of the GST Act, if invoice for such service were received after the appointed date.
Held - The applicant subsequently sought to withdrawn the present application on grounds that the matter at hand stood resolved during adjudication - Hence the application is dismissed as withdrawn: AAR
- Application dismissed: AAR
HIGH COURT CASES
2019-TIOL-762-HC-KAR-GST
Kongovi Pvt Ltd Vs UoI
GST - The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Revenue in not permitting the former to correct an error which occurred when filing Form GST TRAN-1, due to which the eligible credit under the earlier indirect tax law could not be transferred to the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner under the GST regime - The petitioner claimed to have filed both Form GST TRAN-1 and and the revised Form GST TRAN-1 within the stipulated time - Hence the present writ petition.
Held - The Rule 117 of the CGST Rules enables submission of a declaration in Form GST TRAN-1 within 90 days from the appointed day on the common portal specified - The Commissioner is also empowered to further extend the period by 90 days - Upon amendment to Rule 117 by inserting sub-rule 1A, the time period specified for filing Form GST TRAN-1 has been extended for further period not beyond 31.03.2019, for registered person who could not submit the declaration by the due date due to technical difficulties on the common portal - Rule 120A providing for revision of declaration, clearly states that the revision in Form GST TRAN-1 can be made only once - Besides, the relevant Circular issued by the CBIC appoints Nodal Officers to resolve all IT-related grievances - Hence the petitioner is directed to approach & raise such grievance before the jurisdictional Nodal Officer, who is directed to dispose of the petitioner's grievance in an expeditious manner: HC
- Assessee's writ petition disposed of: KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
2019-TIOL-761-HC-MAD-GST
G Murugan Vs Government Of India
GST - The petitioner was carrying goods for a company, from its warehouse to their destination, both located within the State of Tamil Nadu - The petitioner claimed that the goods were covered by the requisite documents such as tax invoices, e-way bills and delivery challan - However, the vehicle carrying the goods was intercepted and the goods were detained - Admittedly, there was a mistake in the vehicle number mentioned - Thereafter, Form GST Mov-02 was issued, directing the physical inspection & verification of the goods - But such form though signed by the proper officer, was blank in all the relevant fields - Hence the present writs were filed challenging the same.
Held - The provisions of Section 129 of the CGST Act enable detention or seizure of goods only if the Revenue is prima facie convinced about contravention of the provisions of the Act or the Rules - Hence the order of detention must reflect the reasons for seizing the goods - A perusal of the order reveals that none of the relevant fields have been ticked - Hence it is unclear as to what statutory provisions or Rule has been contravened - The Revenue's counsel is also unable to throw light upon the alleged contraventions - Detention of conveyance vehicle and the goods is an extreme measure & the Proper Officer is obliged to state the contravention in the field provided for such purpose - This exercise was not done in the present case - Moreover, it would be improper to file appeal against such order as the appeal would have to assume the alleged contravention - Thus the present detention order is unsustainable and warrants being quashed: HC (Para 4,5,10,11,12)
- Assessee's writ petitions allowed: MADRAS HIGH COURT
2019-TIOL-760-HC-AHM-GST
Balkrishna Steel Traders Vs State Of Gujarat
GST - During the relevant period, certain goods belonging to the petitioner were seized in transit - Thus the petitioners filed the present writ petition, claiming the SCNs seeking to impose penalty, redemption fine and proposing to confiscate the goods u/s 130 of the CGST Act, had been issued without initiating proceedings u/s 129 of the CGST Act.
Held - The petitioner has already paid the tax and penalty u/s 129 of the IGST Act - Hence as a measure of interim relief, the Revenue is directed to release the vehicle along with the goods contained therein - Nonetheless, the petitioner must file an undertaking that it will cooperate in the proceedings even if the issue is settled against it: HC
- Assessee's writ petition allowed: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2019-TIOL-759-HC-P&H-GST
Arya Sudharma Tradex Vs State Of Punjab
GST - Some goods belonging to the petitioner herein were seized & pursuant to which duty demand was raised with penalty being imposed - The petitioner filed the present writ claiming that an assessment order passed against it is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Punjab GST Act.
Held - The Revenue's counsel states that the goods were released and the duty demand with penalty was deposited by the petitioner - Besides, such order is appealable u/s 107 of the Punjab GST Act - Hence the petitioner is directed to file appeal before the appellate authority: HC
- Assessee's writ petition disposed of: PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
