FLASH NEWS
Bihar CM writes to GST Council to grant exemption to inputs consumed in Gurudwara Langar
GoM led by Sushil Modi slated to meet early next week to further discuss GST Return format
TOP NEWS
GST - Over 34 lakh e-Way Bills generated in first 5 days
5% GST on catering in railway stations & trains
GST - Govt sets up Grievance Redressal Mechanism for technical glitches
e-Way Bill roll-out - About 20K transporters not registered under GST, enrol on new portal
e-Way Bill - five large states going for intra-State option from April 15
e-Way Bill - It was low-generation day for all States except for Karnataka & Gujarat
e-Way Bill - CBEC issues clarifications valid for certain situations
CGST CIRUCLAR
40/2018
Clarification on issues related to furnishing of Bond/Letter of Undertaking for exports
NOTIFICATION
Applications invited for 2 posts of Technical Member at Anti-Profiteering Authority
JEST GST (By Vijay Kumar)
GS(T)EA
CBEC becomes CBIC
GST CASES
HIGH COURT
2018-TIOL-25-HC-AHM-GST
Liberty Chemtrade Pvt Ltd Vs UoI
IGST - Petitioners have challenged the Circular 46/2017-Cus dated 24th November 2017 which clarifies that Integrated Goods and Services Tax would be leviable at the time of transaction of sale of warehoused goods between the importer and any other person, even before clearance of the goods - Petitioner contends that IGST on the imported goods can be levied only at the time of clearance of goods and the Government of India has no authority to levy such tax at the time of sale of warehoused goods before the customs clearance.
Held: Notice issued - Returnable on 10th May 2018: High Court [para 1] - Notice issued: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2018-TIOL-24-HC-MUM-GST + Story
Builders Association of Navi Mumbai Vs UoI
GST - CIDCO has correctly collected GST on the total one-time lease premium amount payable by the successful allottee at the rate of 18% - Demand for payment of GST is in accordance with law - said demand cannot be said to be vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the record: High Court [para 12 to 14, 21] - Petition dismissed: BOMBAY HIGH COURT
2018-TIOL-23-HC-MUM-GST
JCB India Ltd Vs UoI
CGST - Section 140(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 - Petitioners challenge clause (iv) prescribing time limit for transitional credit availment on the ground that the same violates the mandate of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Held: CENVAT credit is a mere concession and it cannot be claimed as a matter of right - credit on inputs under the existing law itself is not absolute but a restricted or conditional right - If the existing law itself imposes condition for its enjoyment or availment, then, it is not possible to agree with the Counsel that such rights under the existing law could have been enjoyed and availed of irrespective of the period or time provided therein - The period or the outer limit is prescribed in the existing law and the Rules of CENVAT credit enacted thereunder - In the circumstances, it is not possible to agree with the Counsel appearing for the petitioners that imposition of the condition vide Clause (iv) is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India - if right to availment of CENVAT credit itself is conditional and not restricted or absolute, then, the right to pass on that credit cannot be claimed in absolute terms - there cannot be a estoppel against a statute - transitional arrangements that have been made have clear nexus with the object sought to be achieved and cannot be struck down as having no such relation or nexus - Petitions fail: High Court [para 47, 50, 51, 52, 56, 57, 61, 65, 66, 67] - Petitions dismissed: BOMBAY HIGH COURT
AAR CASES
2018-TIOL-03-AAR-GST + Story
N C Varghese
GST - Applicant is engaged in the purchase and cutting and removal of rubber trees from the plantations of certain PSUs owned by the Government of Kerala and also from private individuals in Kerala - State Farming Corporation is demanding 18% on live rubber trees – Applicant before AAR seeking clarification on classification and rate of tax. Held: As per the definition of goods in Section 2(52) of CGST Act, 2017 , ''goods" means every kind of movable property other than money and securities but includes actionable claim, growing crops, grass and things attached to or forming part of the land which are agreed to be severed before supply or under a contract of supply - Rubber trees are agreed to be severed before supply and hence, comes under the definition of 'goods' – since standing rubber trees no longer remain as such, they are to be treated ad ‘wood in rough form' – There is no differentiation between Soft wood and hardwood in GST - Rate of tax on rubber wood in the aforesaid transaction is 18% under the HSN 4403: AAR [para 7, 8, 9] - Application disposed: AAR
2018-TIOL-02-AAR-GST + Story
Synthite industries Ltd
GST - Goods are liable to IGST when they are imported into India and the IGST is payable at the time of importation of goods into India: AAR [para 13] GST - Integrated tax on goods imported into India shall be levied and collected at the point when duties of customs are levied on the said goods under Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962 i.e. on the date determined as per provisions of Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962: AAR [para 10]
GST - Applicant is neither liable to GST on the sale of goods procured from China and directly supplied to USA nor on the sale of goods stored in the warehouse in Netherlands, after being procured from China, to customers, in and around Netherlands, as the goods are not imported into India at any point: AAR [para 13] - Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-01-AAR-GST +
Story
Caltech Polymers Pvt Ltd
GST - Recovery of food expenses from the employees for the canteen services provided by company is an 'outward supply', hence taxable: AAR [para 12] GST - Canteen service to employees - There is no similar exemption (notification 25/2012-ST) as existing under the Finance Act, 1994 prevailing under the GST laws: AAR [para 8] GST – Upon a plain reading of the definition of "business" given in Section 2(17), clauses (a) and (b) of the CGST Act, it could be safely concluded that the supply of food by the applicant to its employees would definitely come under clause (b) of Section 2(17) as a transaction incidental or ancillary to the main business: AAR [para 9] GST - Even though there is no profit as claimed by the applicant on the supply of food to its employees, there is "supply" as provided in Section 7(1)(a) of the GST Act, 2017. The applicant would definitely come under the definition of "Supplier" as provided in sub-section (105) of Section 2 of the GST Act, 2017: AAR [para 10] GST - Since the applicant recovers the cost of food from its employees, there is consideration as defined in Section 2(31) of the GST Act, 2017: AAR [para 11] Ruling: + Recovery of food expenses from the employees for the canteen services provided by company would come under the definition of 'outward supply' as defined in Section 2(83) of the Act, 2017, and therefore, taxable as a supply of service under GST. [para 12] - Application disposed of: AAR
ARTICLES
GST - New Financial Year starts with a bang
Discounts as brand builders - Not a capital argument
After achieving targets here comes 'Goose Pimples' Season for Income Tax Department!
GST future reforms - A Litmus Test for Cooperative Federalism!
Treading GST Path XLIII - Advance Ruling on Canteens - The Pandora's (tiffin)box
Personal Use: Dawn of new jurisprudence?
Scrutiny of input invoices - GST refund claims of accumulated credit
Ocean Freight and double taxation continuum
Decoding Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017
Amount charged and service - the nexus
