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
 
Input tax credit of 'IGST' paid on imported goods not admissible: Unbelievable/unintended but true

JUNE 12, 2017

By R K Singh

'ACT in haste, repent at leisure' is a proverb which aptly applies to drafting of new statutes in hasteas it generally ends up adversely impacting the quality of their language and sometimes alsoresults in disharmony vis-a-vis existing statutes, leading to prolonged interpretational disputes. The GST legislations seem to be victims of that syndrome, given the tight deadlines under which the drafting teams had to operate resulting in several unintended consequences. One such consequence was demonstrated in an article titled 'Supplies of goods from SEZ: IGST required to be paid twice under GST regime: Unintended (?), but true' published on this website a few days ago.

2. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate as to how as per the strict interpretation of law 'IGST' paid on imported goods will not be admissible as input tax credit although the intention is obviously otherwise.

3. As per section 16 of the CGST Act, a registered person is, subject to certain conditions and restrictions, entitled take credit of 'input tax' charged on any supply of goods or services or both to him which are used or intended to be used in the course or furtherance of his business. Section 2(62) of the CGST Act defines'input tax'as under:

S.2(62) "input tax" in relation to a registered person, means the central tax, State tax, integrated tax or Union territory tax charged on any supply of goods or services or both made to him and includes - (a) the integrated goods and services tax charged on import of goods; (b) the tax payable under the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 9; (c) the tax payable under the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 5 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act; (d) the tax payable under the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 9 of the respective State Goods and Services Tax Act; or (e) the tax payable under the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 7 of the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, but does not include the tax paid under the composition levy;

It is noteworthy that none of the countervailing duties payable under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act are included in the definition of 'input tax'. It is useful to remember that in Rule3 of Cenvat Credit Rules,2004, the additional duty leviable under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act equivalent to the duty of excise was specifically included as the eligible duty for the purpose of cenvat credit.

4. The Customs Tariff Act has been amended to, inter alia , incorporate the following Sub-section (7) in Section 3 thereof which provides for levy of countervailing duty on imported article equal to IGST payable on interstate supplies of like article.

"S. 3(7) Any article which is imported into India shall, in addition, be liable to integrated tax at such rate, not exceeding forty per cent as is leviable under Section 5 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on a like article on its supply in India, on the value of the imported article as determined under sub-section (8).

As the above-quoted Section 3(7) of Customs Tariff Act refers to Section 5 of the IGST Act, for the sake of ready reference the relevant part of the said Section 5 is reproduced below:

S. 5. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), there shall be levied a tax called the integrated goods and services tax on all inter-State supplies of goods or services or both, except on the supply of alcoholic liquor for human consumption, on the value determined under section 15 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act and at such rates, not exceeding forty per cent., as may be notified by the Government on the recommendations of the Council and collected in such manner as may be prescribed and shall be paid by the taxable person:

Provided that the integrated tax on goods imported into India shall be levied and collected in accordance with the provisions of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 on the value as determined under the said Act at the point when duties of customs are levied on the said goods under section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962.

As may be observed, as per the proviso to Section 5 (1) of the IGST Act, integrated tax on the goods imported into India is to be levied and collected in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of Customs Tariff Act. But there is no provision in Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act to collect integrated tax thereunder in pursuance of the said proviso . The integrated tax under the provisions of Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act is levied,not in terms of (or because of)the said proviso, but in termsof the said provisions of a separate, independent Act, namely, Customs Tariff Act. To put it differently, the levy under Section 3(7)of the Customs Tarif Act is not dependent upon the existence of the proviso to Section 5(1) of the IGST Act. In other words, even if the proviso to Section 5(1) of the IGST Act was absent, by virtue of Section 3 (7) of the Customs Tariff Act, on an imported article a tax equivalent to the IGST leviable on inter state supply of a like article would be leviable. The point being made is that the duty leviable under Sub-section (7) of Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act is a duty of Customs and is not a duty leviable under the IGST Act or because of the said proviso to Section 5(1) of the IGST Act. Thus, to reiterate, it is clear that the duty leviable on an imported article under Subsection (7) of Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act is not 'integrated goods and services tax' but a duty of customs(which is equivalent to the integrated goods and services tax leviable on a like article under IGST Act).

5. As already pointed out, duty of customs leviable under any of the the provisions of Customs Tariff Act is not covered under the scope of 'input tax' as defined in Section 2(62) of the CGST Act and, therefore, credit of duty paid under Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act will not be admissible as input tax credit.Indeed it was to tide over this technical hitch that under the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004, a provision was specially made, as mentioned earlier, to allow credit of additional duty leviable under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act. A similar provision is conspicuous by its absence under the GST laws.

6. Nonadmissibility of credit of the duty paid under Sub-section 7 of Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act has huge implications for the domestic industry which are too obvious to need elaboration. It is, therefore, high time that the policymakers initiate urgent steps to rectify the above-mentioned serious (though unintended) consequence as the D day ( July 1) is approaching fast.  

(The author is Retired Chief Commissioner/Member CESTAT and the views expressed are strictly personal.)

GST Roll-Out - Are we ready? - Episode 1

GST Rollout | Episode 2 | simply inTAXicating

GST Rollout | simply inTAXicating

GST RO(W)AD AHEAD | Episode 8 | Panel Discussion | simply inTAXicating

GST RO(W)AD AHEAD | Episode 7 | Panel Discussion | simply inTAXicating

Also See : TIOL TUBE Videos on GST

 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Credit of IGST on imported goods IS ADMISSIBLE


1. Please compare Section 3(7) “liability to pay” with a CTA “levy” under Section 3(1). "Additional duty" under section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act (popularly called CVD) is an independant levy under the CTA which Additional Duty is collected by borrowing the provisions of the "Customs Act" ( old Section 3(7), new 3(12) of CTA). Hence 3(1) duty is only a duty under Section (3) (1) of the CTA, (Not under the Customs Act) which Additional Duty is collected by the machinery provisions of the Customs Act. That is precisely the reason behind Section 30 of the SEZ Act specifying that "customs Duty" as well as "duties" under the "CTA" - thus differentiating duty under the Customs Act with the 'Duties' under CTA. So, Customs duty under Section 12 of the Customs Act is thus different from the independent "duty" under Section 3(1) of the CTA.

2. 'integrated Tax' is a defined term. the levy is under IGST ALONE. section 3(7) of Customs Tariff Act is NOT a Counterveiling duty, unlike the duty under section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, which is a "levy" under the CTA.

Posted by RG_Subramanian RG_Subramanian
 
Sub: IGST input tax credit on imported goods

Sir, I beg to differ with learned author that IGST paid on imported goods is not eligible for credit. Learned author relied on Section 7(5)of IGST Act,2017 earlier to hold a view that DTA supplies from SEZ unit attract IGST twice without considering the specic provision of Section 30 therein that governs payment of tax on DTA supplies. However,learned author in the present article did not consider the same Section 7(2) of IGST Act,2017 that treats imports on par with inter-state supplies. Once it is deemed that supplies are inter-state supplies IGST is payable on imports as per proviso to Section 5 of IGST Act,2017 which is covered in the input tax definition. Provisio to Section 5 made it clear that IGST is collected as provided for in Section 3 of CTA. We all must agree that Law is dynamic. We need not compare with existing provisions. IGST on imported goods is payable as per Section 7(2) ibid. I am of the personal view that the present definition is in tune with IGST provisions read with Section 3 of CTA and the input tax credit on imports is admissible even if there is no mention of additional duty of Customs in the definition. Views expressed are strictly personal.

Posted by rrkothapally rrkothapally
 
Sub: Input tax credit of IGST

Sir, I post my opinion as follows for further examination. Earlier CVD (=excise duty) was called and collected as Addl Duty of customs and therefore it was specifically mentioned as one of the eligible duties available as credit under CCR. In GST , IGST on imported goods, though collected under CTA, still called and collected as IGST only. So clause (a) of Sec 2(62) of CGST wherein input tax is defined, squarely covers the IGST payable on imported goods

Posted by mallikarjun reddy c
 

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.