News Update

Cus - Export of non-basmati rice - Notification 20/2023 insofar as it denies the benefit of the transitional arrangement as contained in para-1.05 of the FTP 2023, is bad in law: HCCus - Refund of SAD - 102/2007-Cus - Areca Nut and Supari are one and the same - Objections with regard to name, nature and status of importer or buyers or the end use of goods purchased by them etc. are extraneous: HCCX - Interest on Refund - Since wrong order annexed by petitioner in paper book, Bench is unable to proceed further - Petition is dismissed with liberty to file a fresh one: HCGST - No E-way bill - When petitioner imports machinery and after Customs clearance, transports same to his own factory, it cannot be said that such a transportation would fall within the definition of term 'supply' - Penalty imposable under second limb of s.129(1)(a): HCGST - Fix responsibility on officers who allowed BG to lapse - Petitioner not justified in not renewing BG - Cost of Rs.15 lacs imposed, to be paid to PM Cares Fund: HCGST - Since the parties agree that petition can be disposed of on the basis of records available before Appellate Authority, petitioner is directed to enclose all documents filed before Appellate Authority in a compilation, in form of a paper book: HCWrong RoadST - Whether any service is used for personal consumption or not is certainly question of fact and being question of fact, no substantial question of law arises: HCGovt proposes to amend Geographical Indication of Goods Rules; Draft issued for feedbackST - If what has been paid as tax is without authority of law, Revenue should refund the same - Denial of credit would result in the whole exercise being tax neutral: HCWarehousing Authority notifies several agri goods to be stored in only registered warehousesST - Even if the petitioner may have a case on merits, it is best left to be decided by the Appellate Authority under the hierarchy prescribed under the FA, 1994: HCUS FDA okays Eli Lilly Alzheimer’s drugGST - Petitioner challenges jurisdiction of assessing officer - Petitioner is entitled to file an appeal u/s 107 by availing an alternate efficacious remedy: HCFive from Telangana killed in car accident on Pune-Solapur HighwayGST - Existence of an alternative remedy is a material consideration but not a bar to the exercise of jurisdiction: HCHush money case against Donald Trump - Sentencing deferred to Sept 18GST - It is open to a trader to take goods by whichever route he opts, unless the law otherwise requires, destination point being intact: HCDeadly hurricane Beryl smashes properties in JamaicaGST - Conclusion that taxable person is providing a service to supplier while taking the benefit of a discount by facilitating an increase in the volume of sales of such supplier is ex facie erroneous and contrary to the fundamental tenets of GST law: HCIsrael claims 900 militants killed in Rafah since May monthGST - Order expressly records that personal hearing notice was returned with endorsement 'no such person at address' - Since petitioner has shifted to a new premises, it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to contest demand: HC116 die in stampede at UP ’Satsang’I-T- Application for revision of order dismissed in limine on grounds of delay; case remanded for re-consideration: HCWe are deepening economic ties with India, says US officialI-T- As per Section 119(2)(b), power to condone applications relate to claims for amount exceeding Rs 50 lakhs are to be considered by CBDT; however it is impermissible for CBDT to pass order on merits: HC8 Dutch engineers build world’s longest bicycle - 180 feet, 11 inchesI-T- Additions framed u/s 68 for unexplained income & u/s 69 for unexplained expenditure not tenable where complete transactional details are furnished & not doubted: HCRailways earns Rs 14798 Crore from Freight loading in June monthI-T- Delay in filing ITR is per se insufficient reason to estimate assessee's profit @15% on turnover, more so where audited financial report is filed in timely manner: ITATMoD inks MoU to set up testing facilities in Unmanned Aerial System in TN Defence Industrial CorridorI-T- For invoking section 69A, assessee should be found to be owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article & which is not recorded in the books of account: ITATGovt proposes Guidelines for ethical approach to Coal MiningI-T- TDS credit can be allowed based on AIS, where details pertaining to TDS, advance tax & other payments are reflected in Form 26AS: ITATVaishnaw to inaugurate Global IndiaAI Summit 2024I-T- Lending money with the primary intention of earning interest can be considered a business activity, but nature and manner of lending, as well as the frequency, should be taken into account: ITAT
 
Job work provision - clarity under Model GST Law

MARCH 07, 2017

By G Mani

Job work is an important activity prevailing for decades. In order to concentrate on core manufacturing technique most of the business houses outsource certain operations.

In this article I would like to discuss job work provisions under Draft Model GST Law and wherever required existing law has been compared for better clarity.

Meaning of Job work

Sec. 2(61) of Model GST Law defines job work as "undertaking any treatment or process by a person on goods belonging to another registered taxable person and the expression job worker shall be construed accordingly". This definition is wider than the definition given in present Central Excise Notification No.214/86–C.E. dated 23.03.1986

Here the important point to be noted is the principal must be a registered taxable person and there is no such condition for a job worker. Also the present concept of process not amounting to manufacture alone is a service is no more relevant. As per Para 3 of Schedule II to MGL "any treatment or process which is being applied to another person's goods" is a supply of service. In short there will be two supplies i) tax liability on principal as supply of goods (of course exempted) while sending goods &ii) tax liability on job workers as a service for doing processing on goods sent by principal.

Present and proposed GST Law

At present Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules permits sending of inputs & capital goods for job work without reversal of credit. Correspondingly, there is a provision in Central Excise Rules also viz. Rule 16A - sending inputs on job work basis after getting permission from the Principal Commissioner of Central Excise or Commissioner of Central Excise. Why there are two provisions for inputs? – Answer is Rule 4(5) (a) of Cenvat Credit Rules is for manufacturers/service providers covered under CENVAT credit chain and Rule 16A of Central Excise Rule is for manufactures not covered under CENVAT credit chain. This distinction has been clearly spelt in Para 1 of Part IV-Chapter 18 of CBEC's Central Excise Manual. The same distinction has been maintained in Sec.20 and Sec.55 of MGL with more relaxation.

While Sec.20 is for suppliers sending goods and/or services covered under ITC net, Sec.55 is for suppliers or goods/services not covered under ITC net. The present Rule 16A of Central Excise Rules mandates permission from Commissioner and such permission is not required as provided under Sec.55 of MGL and simple intimation suffices. Rule 16A permitted only inputs and the proposed Sec.55 permits inputs as well as capital goods. A welcome relaxation. Further Sec.20 does not mandate any intimation procedure for goods/services or supplies covered under ITC. Existing facility has been maintained.

A pertinent question that arises here is that the present Rule 16B and Rule 16C of CER which deal with sending semi-finished goods and finished goods for job work respectively are absent in Sec.55 of MGL. Also there is no provision for sending partially processed inputs under Sec.20 of MGL. Answer is that there is no requirement of such separate provisions as the term input as defined under Sec. 2(52) of MGL itself includes any goods other than capital goods used or intended to be used by a supplier in the course of furtherance of business. Processed inputs, semi-finished goods and finished goods are all covered under the term ‘input'. On this line, partially processed inputs, semi- finished goods can also be sent for job work under GST Regime.

Declaration of place of job work

With regard to incorporation of job work premises in registration certificate it is not required under Sec.20 whereas it is required under Sec.55. As per proviso to Sec. 55(1) the principal has to declare job worker's premises as place of business in his registration certificate and the same is not required if the job worker is already registered under Sec.23 or where the principal is engaged in certain specified supplies as may be notified by the Commissioner.

Sending all goods by principal

Is it required to send all the inputs and capital goods by the principal for job work? At present all main raw materials are to be sent by the principal and the job worker can use tools, machinery and consumable. In CST/VAT laws it is a well settled legal position that in consumable & machinery there is no transfer of property involved in goods. As GST being a new law, in the absence of judicial test on use of tools, machineries and consumable whether would result into transfer of property in goods or not is a question mark? Sec.20 specifically includes capital goods and consumables also which fall as inputs. Hence there is a need of clarity. Otherwise, there will be a clash between works contract service and activity carried out by a job worker.

Return of jobbed item

In GST, time limit for returning back the jobbed goods has been increased from 6 months to one year for inputs and 2 yrs. to 3 yrs. for capital goods. Non-return will be treated as a deemed supply as if it happened on the day of sending materials for job work. GST or IGST law, as the case may be, applies for payment of tax from the date of sending the material. Also interest is payable for the same. In the absence of GST Valuation Rules, we cannot conclude the transaction value now for this. On this front, there is a paradigm shift from the present procedure. At present, CENVAT credit has to be reversed for non-return without any payment of interest and the reversed credit can be taken as re-credit when jobbed goods are received subsequently. In GST scenario one has to pay tax and interest for goods not returned and in case job worker wants to return after the prescribed date, again he has to pay GST treating it as separate supply.

Transitional provision

In terms of Sec.175, 176 & 177, inputs, semi-finished goods & final products sent for job work under the earlier law if returned within six months or further period of two months as may be permitted from the date of GST implementation, there is no need of tax payment. For this,both principal and job worker have to make a declaration for the stock held as on the appointed day of GST. In case of non-return within six months, tax would be collected as arrears of tax under GST Law and the same cannot be taken as ITC- Ref. Sec.184.

Waste and Scrap

According to Sec. 55(5),waste and scrap generated may be supplied by the job worker directly on payment of tax if such job worker is registered. If job worker is not registered the principal is liable. More clarity than present provisions where it is not clearly spelt who is liable to pay tax. There is no similar provision in Sec.20 because in ITC taken cases return of processed item with waste/scrap is a must.

Direct clearance after jobbing

Jobbed items can be cleared directly from the place of job work premises on payment of tax within India or with or without payment of tax for export as provided under Sec.55 (1) (b) and Sec.20(3) subject to the condition of within one year. There is no permission is required for such direct clearance.

Accountability

For supplies made under Sec.55 the responsibility for accountability of the inputs and capital goods shall lie with the principal as provided under Clause (2) of said section.

Commercial Job work

There is a concept of commercial job work prevailing in business operation where principal and job worker follow payment of excise duty for the movements. This is on the point that for doing jobbing the job worker uses machineries, tools and consumables on which if they don't take tax credit it will be a big cost to them. To avail tax credit they go for registration and avail tax credit. Whether this can be done in GST? To my mind, it is yes because of changes made from First MGL to Revised MGL.

Proviso to Schedule I of First MGL provided that the supply of goods by a registered taxable person to a job worker in terms of Sec.43A shall not be treated as supply of goods. This has been deleted in Revised MGL making such movement as supply . As the movement has become supply, both the principal and the job worker can opt to pay GST for the movement, if they desire to do so.

Simplification in valuation

As explained most of the job work compliances have been simplified in the Model GST Law. However the major simplification lies in valuation of job work supply. We had experience of Supreme Court Judgment in Ujagar Prints v UOI – 2002-TIOL-03-SC-CX where in it has been clarified that the value has to be arrived on the cost of raw materials and job charges collected. Before this decision, there were a lot of interpretations/confusions around job work valuation.

Also to set right the issue Rule 10A had been specifically brought under Valuation Rules effective 01.04.2007. Still there are disputes on following Rule 10A or Rule 8 or Rule 11 of CEVR, 2000 in respect of direct clearance from job work premises. Taking clue of all these experiences, it is requested that the Government comes forward with a simplified and transparent provision in GST Valuation Rules.

(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 site)

 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Removal of capital goods for repairing or reconditioning etc

Dear Mr. Mani you have focused only on removal of input for job work under Section 16 of Model GST law. What will happen if the capital goods on which ITC has been taken sent for repairing or reconditioning as many a times, the capital goods particularly, the machine tools are also required to be sent to another person for repairing or reconditioning. Is there any such provision in the law for such a situation. If not, how the capital goods will be removed from the factory of manufacturer and under what document.

Posted by cestat cestat
 

TIOL Tube Latest

India's Path to Becoming a Superpower: An Interview with Pratap Singh



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