TOP NEWS
IGST refunds - Govt scotches rumors of manual checking
GST CASES
AAR CASES
2019-TIOL-172-AAR-GST
Sutherland Mortgage Services Inc
GST - Question raised by applicant is whether the supply made would qualify as export of service as defined in Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017 - Question essentially involves the determination of 'place of supply' which is not included in Section 97 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017 as a question on which advance ruling can be sought - authority is a creature of statute and has to function within the legal boundary mandated by the Act - As the 'place of supply' is not covered by Section 97(2) of the Acts, this authority is helpless to answer the question raised in the application, as it is lacking jurisdiction to decide the issues – Application rejected: AAR
- Application rejected: AAR
2019-TIOL-171-AAR-GST
Puthoor Unnikrishnan
GST - Providing labour services for setting up fire lines, plantation of trees in forest, river maintenance in forest, clearing of truck path in forest are pure services that are clearly covered in 12th Schedule under Article 243W of the Constitution - services are, therefore, exempted as per Sl.No.3 of the Notification 12/2017-CTR: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2019-TIOL-170-AAR-GST
Jalaram Feeds
GST - Applicant is into manufacturing of only Compound Animal Feed (HSN Code 2309) and the said product is exempted under the CGST Act and no other supply of any kind of goods and services is made by the firm - applicant submits that since it is into supply of only exempted goods, whether it is covered u/s 23 of the Act and is not liable to take registration under the Act although they are required to avail the services of Goods Transport Agency and which entails them to pay GST under reverse charge; that since section 24 overrules section 22 and not section 23 they would not be required to take registration.
Held: It is observed that Goods Transport service is notified under notification 13/2017-CTR which requires tax to be paid by the recipient on reverse charge basis and as per section 9(4) of the Act all the provisions of this Act shall apply to such recipient (applicant) as if they are the persons liable for paying the tax in relation to such supply - accordingly, from a conjoint reading of section 9 and 24 of the Act since the applicant is required to pay tax under reverse charge, they have to compulsorily register under GST and the requirements of section 22(1) pertaining to taxable supply and the threshold limit are not applicable to them - argument made by the applicant would render section 24 of the Act redundant and the applicant would not be required to pay the tax on services of Goods Transport Agency on reverse basis provided in s.24 of the Act - it is a well settled principle of law that the law should not be interpreted in such a way to make any part of the statute redundant - by application of the said principles of jurisprudence namely the rule of harmonious construction and the rule against redundancy, the applicant would go out of the scope of s.23 of the GST Act because he is making certain quantity of taxable supply of goods transport service by way of reverse charge mechanism - applicant is required to obtain registration under the Act in order to discharge his tax liability under reverse charge notwithstanding the turnover limits specified in sub-section (1) of section 22 of the GST Act: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2019-TIOL-169-AAR-GST
Gandhar Oil Refinery India Ltd
GST - Applicant is engaged in trading activity of Non-coking coal and manufacturing activity of Petroleum products - manufacturing activity is carried out from plant located at Silvassa and Taloja (Maharashtra) and trading activity is carried from various States by importing said coal at various ports and also purchasing from dealers within India; that coal is imported at various ports situated in various States and they are registered separately - applicant seeks an advance ruling on whether they can adopt the procedure to raise the invoice from Mumbai HO for imports received at various ports, located in various States and charge IGST from Mumbai to their customers in various States; whether if they cancel the separate registrations in various States can they do the transaction on Mumbai HO GSTN and in the E-way bill mention the GSTN of Mumbai.
Held: Since the applicant is importing the goods into India, as per s.7(2) of the Act such supply of goods shall be treated as supply of goods in the course of inter state trade or commerce; the place of supply shall be the location of the importer in view of s.11(a) of the IGST Act viz. Mumbai, Maharashtra since the importer is registered in Mumbai; hence the applicant will be clearing the goods by paying IGST from their GSTIN issued in Mumbai, Maharashtra - as applicant would be storing the goods, after import, in various States for further sales, whether that would be interstate or intrastate supply would depend upon the place of supply of goods as per s.10 and s.11 of the IGST Act; Authority is of the opinion that the place from where the applicant makes a taxable supply of goods shall be his location, in this case, the Mumbai Head Office/Registered Office at Mumbai and even if the applicant has godowns in different States, it is felt that the applicant can clear the goods on the basis of invoices issued by Mumbai HO/Registered Office at Mumbai on payment of IGST in the State of Maharashtra; therefore, no need for taking separate registration in other States - as regards the other questions since the same is not covered u/s 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 they are not answered: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2019-TIOL-168-AAR-GST
City And Industrial Development Corporation Of Maharashtra Ltd
GST - Applicant seeks a ruling as to whether the supply of services of “transfer by way of lease” of vacant plots of Maharashtra State Government owned lands or privately owned lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the Maharashtra State Government vested in CIDCO to Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and Panvel Municipal Corporation can be said to be covered within the scope of entry at Sr. no. 3 or any other entry of the Notification no. 12/2017-CTR.
Held: In the case of Application filed by M/s LeenaPowertech Engineers Pvt. Ltd., the Bench has already held that the applicant CIDCO is clearly covered under the definition of “Government Entity” - In the present case, the applicant is only going to le2019-TIOL-169-AAR-GSTase out the lands to the Municipal Corporations and there is no element of goods involved in the subject transaction, hence Authority has no hesitation in considering the subject services as “pure services” - Pure services, as in the instant case, provided to a local authority (NMMC and PMC) is covered under Sr. no. 3 of Notification 12/2017-CTR - read with Articles 243G and 243W of the
Constitution, lease of plots to NMMC for Indoor Recreation Centre, Slaughter House, to PMC for Ward Office would be exempt as per sr. no.3 of 12/2017-CTR; however, lease of plots to PMC for construction of Commissioner's and Mayor's residences will not be exempt and is liable to GST under Chapter 9972, @18% Sr. no. 16, clause (iii) of Notification 12/2017-CTR and parallel notifications issued under MGST Act: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2019-TIOL-167-AAR-GST
Aarel Import Export Pvt Ltd
GST - Applicant seeks to know as to whether the procedure of raising invoice from Mumbai office for imports received at Paradip Port, Odisha where they do not have any separate GST registration and charge IGST from Mumbai to their customers is correct or whether they have to take separate registration in the State of Odisha; whether, if they are not required to take separate registration, they can in the case of issuance of e-way bill mention the GSTIN of Mumbai and dispatch place as Paradip port.
Held: In the present case, the place of supply is the location of the importer who is situated in the State of Maharashtra and hence the applicant will be clearing the goods by paying IGST using GSTIN issued to them in Mumbai - since the applicant has no establishment or place of operation or any godown or GSTIN in the State of Odisha, Paradip Port i.e. at the port of import, Authority is of the opinion that the place of supply shall be the place from where the applicant makes a taxable supply of goods, which in this case is the Mumbai Head Office - Applicant can, therefore, clear the goods on the basis of invoices issued by Mumbai Head Office and, therefore, they need not take separate registration in the State of Odisha - resultantly, since, as an importer the place of supply for the applicant is Mumbai and the goods also will be cleared on the name of the Mumbai registered address while paying IGST at the time of Customs clearance, it would follow that they can do the further transaction mentioning the GSTIN of their Mumbai office; that they can do the transaction on Mumbai HO GSTIN and can mention the GSTIN of Mumbai HO in the E-way bill and dispatch place as Customs Warehouse, Odisha, Paradip Port: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2019-TIOL-166-AAR-GST
General Manager Ordnance Factory Bhandara
GST - Indian Ordnance Factory is an industrial organization functioning under the Department of Defence Production of Ministry of Defence, GOI - Section 2(53) of the Act defines the word "Government" as the Central/State government - applicant is not created by the Constitution of India as a legislative, executive or judicial authority, hence applicant cannot be treated as "Government" - applicant is not entitled to get exemption under notification 12/2017-CTR in respect of 'liquidated damages' deducted from the payments to be made to suppliers in case of delayed delivery of goods or services; security deposit of suppliers forfeited by applicant due to non-fulfillment of certain contract conditions will also not be exempted as per sr. no. 62, 12/2017-CTR; unclaimed security deposit cannot be treated as consideration received for supply of goods or services, therefore, applicant not liable to pay tax thereon; nominal charges recovered from employees for availing canteen facility inside factory premises is taxable in terms of 11/2017-CTR under SAC 9963, sr. no.6 of exemption list 12/2017 is not available; renting of Community hall to employees is also liable to GST; since applicant is not an educational institution, school bus facility extended to children of employees is also taxable, not exempted under sr. no. 66(b) of 12/2017-CTR, so also is services of conducting exams taxable; however, renting of residential dwelling is an exempt supply of service - ITC is available only in respect of expenditure related to purchase of LPG cylinders used within industrial canteen - ITC not available in respect of maintenance of garden inside factory premises, parks, playground etc.; also not available in respect of expenditure related to maintenance and upkeep of guest houses, medicines purchased by hospital maintained for treatment of factory employees and dependents - exemption from preparation and generation of E-way bill is available to the applicant being a 'defence formation' - exemption is available from payment of GST on transport of 'military or defence equipment' through GTA - ITCis not required to be reversed on finished goods that are destroyed during testing - Proportionate ITC is required to be reversed in cases where lesser payment is made to supplier due to deduction on account of liquidated damages from supplier's dues - Applicant is also not eligible for exemption in terms of notification 2/2018-CTR in relation to services provided to them by an arbitrator or an Advocate - Renting of immovable property for non-residential purpose is taxable at the hands of the applicant - Applicant is also required to discharge GST on sale of used vehicles, seized and confiscated goods, old and used goods, waste and scrap to a GST registered person: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2019-TIOL-165-AAR-GST
CS Diesel Engineering Pvt Ltd
GST - Main Propulsion Engine for ships, Marine Gear box and marine Generator supplied by applicant to dealers of shipyard manufacturers are used as Parts of vessels falling under 8901, 8902, 8904, 8905, 8906 and 8907 and are covered by the specific entry against Sr. 252 of Schedule I of Notification 1/2017-CTR and attract GST @5%: AAR
GST- Insofar as questions related to the transaction of supply of Marine engines by M/s Ashok Leyland are concerned and which are supplied as such to various dealers of shipyard manufacturers viz. whether applicant can buy these engines from Ashok Leyland @5% GST with their letter of undertaking, same are out of the purview of the AAR in view of s.95 and s.97 of the CGST Act: AAR
-Application disposed of: AAR
HIGH COURT CASES
2019-TIOL-1289-HC-MAD-GST
Daejung Moparts Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner OF CGST & CE
GST - The present writs were filed to contest attachment of bank accounts being operated by the assessee-company.
Held - It is seen that the bank account in question contains sufficient balance - Hence the assessee is directed to pay the admitted amount of duty, upon which the attachment would stand quashed - The assessee is free to operate the bank account except for the amount payable on account of admitted duty: HC
- Writ petition disposed of: MADRAS HIGH COURT
2019-TIOL-1257-HC-MUM-GST
Basell Polyolefins India Pvt Ltd Vs UoI
GST - Petitioners seek to withdraw their individual Petitions with liberty to approach the Goods and Services Tax Council with their grievance of omitting to take accrued credit in its TRAN-1 under the CGST Act which the petitioner submits is on account of human error - Liberty as sought is granted - Petitions disposed of as withdrawn: High Court [para 3]
- Petitions disposed of: BOMBAY HIGH COURT
2019-TIOL-1256-HC-MUM-GST
Jitendra's Auto World Vs UoI
GST - Petitioner challenges the decision dated 22nd December, 2018 taken by the Goods and Services Tax Council - GST Council held that there are/were no technical glitches for filing of TRAN declaration under the CGST Act within the period of limitation - Petitioner submits that the said decision does not indicate any application of mind - respondent Counsel for Revenue seeks time to take instructions and file affidavit - Matter posted to 12 July 2019: High Court [para 2, 3]
- Matter posted: BOMBAY HIGH COURT
ARTICLES
GST Council may go for many mega decisions
GST - Agenda for the second year - Part 42 - Recasting advance rulings authority
Priorities for GST - 2.0 - Suggestions on GST - Selected Issues
Priorities for GST 2.0 - Improve Index of ease of doing business
JEST GST by Vijay Kumar
Axe Falls on Tax Officers - Compulsory Retirement
