GST (SUPREME COURT CASE)
2018-TIOL-04-SC-GST
Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt Ltd Vs CCT
GST - The assessee company is engaged in multi model transportation of shipments, supply chain management & other allied services - During the period of dispute, a vehicle belonging to the petitioner was inspected u/s 68 of the MP GST Act, which provides for inspection of goods in movement - On enquiry, the vehicle driver produced the bill & challan, but regarding the e-way bill it was found that the part-B of the e-way bill was not updated - The Department alleged contravention of Rule 138 & Section 68 of the Act - Penalty was imposed u/s 122 for transporting taxable goods without cover of documents - In defence, the assessee claimed that it was unable to update part B of the e-way bill due to technical errors - The High Court held that as the distance to be traversed exceeded 1300 KMs, the assessee was obliged to file Part B of the e-way bill, specifying all details such as vehicle number before the goods are loaded in the vehicle - Hence the penalty was upheld.
Held - As the assessee paid the tax and other dues demanded, the vehicle and the goods seized should be released - Such findings are separate from the further order to be passed in the assessee's SLP: SC
- Interim Application disposed of: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
GST (AAAR CASES)
2018-TIOL-16-AAAR-GST
Giriraj Renewables Pvt Ltd
Facts: Appellants is engaged in supply and end to end setting up of Solar Power Generating systems - AAR in its ruling held that as per clause D of the contract, the equipment (PV module) is imported and directly transferred to the owner by way of High Sea Sale; that the owner files the Bill of Entry with customs for clearance of the said PV module and which indicates that the owner had procured the goods which have been made available to the contractor - as the major component (PV module) said to be consituting 70% of the whole project cannot be construed to be supplied by the applicant (now appellant) consequent upon High Sea S ale of the said product, it cannot be construed to be a principal supply of the project; that, therefore, the concept of natural bundling does not apply; that since the main equipment i.e PV module is procured by the owner himself, it cannot be construed as a principal supply by the contractor (applicant) and hence the question whether the supply can be said to be ‘Solar Power Generating System' taxable @5% GST is irrelevant; that the supplies made by the sub-contractors is an individual supply and appropriate GST had to be applied depending upon the nature of supply - appeal to the AAAR.
Held: Supply of the PV module which is the major component of the Solar Power Plant is not naturally bundled with the supply of the remaining components & parts of the Solar Power Plant and the supply of the services of erection, installation and commissioning of the solar power plant; supply of PV module is a distinct transaction - supply of the remaining portion of the contract in question which involves supply of the balance components and parts of the solar power plant and the supply of services of erection, installation and commissioning of the Solar Power Plant is to be viewed as a ‘composite supply' as supply of goods and services are naturally bundled - Tax liability on this portion of the contract (other than PV module) which is termed as ‘composite supply' will be determined in terms of s.8 of the CGST Act, 2017 wherein the rate applicable to the dominant nature of the supply will prevail - AAR order modified: AAAR
- Appeal disposed of: AAAR
2018-TIOL-15-AAAR-GST
Tathagat Heart Care Centre Llp
Facts: Appellant had filed an application before AAR seeking a ruling on the question as to whether GST is leviable on rent payable by a hospital supplying lifesaving services (cardiology and emergency services) - AAR had held that GST is leviable on the rent paid/payable for premises taken on lease by the appliant - appeal to AAAR.
Held: Healthcare services which the appellant provides as his outward supply is exempted from GST by virtue of entry Sl. no. 74 of Notification 12/2017-CTR - services by way of renting of residential building for use of residence only is exempt from levy of GST vide Sl. No. 12 of the notification 12/2017-CTR and in terms of notification 11/2017-CTR, GST is leviable @18% (CGST + SGST) on the rent paid/payable for premises taken on lease by the applicant for running the hospital vide Sl. No.16 of the said notification - scope of appellate authority u/s 101 of CGST Act, 2017 is limited to passing such order confirming or modifying the ruling appealed against - there was no question raised before the AAR seeking a ruling on the aspect of ITC used in providing exempted supplies and refund of ITC - since this issue has been raised for the first time before the AAAR, there can be no appeal on issues on which no ruling was sought before the AAR - order of AAR upheld and appeal dismissed: AAAR
- Appeal dismissed: AAAR
GST (AAR CASES)
2018-TIOL-165-AAR-GST
Tag Solar System
GST - Scope of work performed by applicant includes procurement, supply, development, testing, commissioning and providing maintenance for 10 years in respect of supply of Solar Photovoltaic (SPV) water pumping system and hence would not get covered under supply of 'Solar Power Generating System' under Entry 234 of Schedule I of Notfn. 1/2017-CTR - Supply, installation, commissioning and maintenance of solar water pumping system falls under the purview of Works Contract as per s.2(119) of CGST Act, 2017 - since it is a single contract, same cannot be split up into two separate contracts and no separate bills can be raised for supply of goods and supply of services - attracts @18% GST: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-164-AAR-GST
Smita Gupta
GST - Laterals of sprinklers such as clamps, bends, tee, coupler, bush, foot button, latch, clamp, riser pipe, socket etc. attract GST @18% while Laterals of drip irrigation system will attract GST @12% in terms of Entry 195B of Schedule II of Notification 1/2017-CTR as amended: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-163-AAR-GST
Pdcor Ltd
GST - Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) is a Governmental authority - Project Management Consulting (PMC) services provided by applicant to JDA for rejuvenation of Amanishah Nallah (Dravyavati river), Jaipur is correctly classifiable under SAC 9983 and is covered under Sl. No. 3 of notification 12/2017-CTR, hence exempt from payment of GST: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-162-AAR-GST
Kei Indutries Ltd
GST - Applicant is engaged in the business of manufacturing and supply of various kinds of 'Electrical Power Cables' - Applicant seeks to supply electrical cables, in accordance with the specifications of M/s Vedanta Ltd. which is undertaking petroleum operations in Rajasthan, and claims concessional rate of tax - Applicant, therefore, seeks a ruling as to whether Power Cables supplied are covered under the scope of Sl. No. 1 of Notificatio 03/2017-CTR. Held: To regard Electrical Cables as "accessories, stores, materials or consumables for running of the goods specified in the List" as mentioned in entry no. 24 of the notification is not rational by any stretch of imagination - If electrical cables are regarded as "accessories, stores, materials or consumables for running of the goods specified in the List", then going through this logic, poles, insulators, transformers and all other equipments used to ensure flow of electricity at work site from the main source to the supply point are to be covered under this classification - Electrical cables, therefore, do not fall under the Entry no. 24 of list as 'material', 'accessories', 'consumables', and/or 'stores' of Sl. No. 1 of notification 03/2017-CTR and are not entitled for the concessional rate of tax: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-161-AAR-GST
Chambal Fertilisers & Chemicals Ltd
GST - Ruling sought on whether in the case of import of goods on CIF basis the applicant is liable to pay GST on the component of Ocean freight paid by the foreign supplier to the shipping company and whether in the case of import of goods on FOB, the applicant, for the purpose of determination of value of goods for payment of IGST, is required to exclude the value of the component of Ocean freight paid to the foreign shipping entity, on which already GST is paid by applicant, being service recipient, in order to avoid double taxation. Held: Applicant is liable to pay IGST on transportation of goods by vessel under reverse charge mechanism (RCM) in terms of notification 10/2017-ITR and as regards the question of exclusion of any component of expenditure upon import of goods (viz. ocean freight) while determining their value at the time of import, the same falls beyond the purview of section 97 of the CGST Act, 2017 and hence no ruling can be given thereon: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
SGST NOTIFICATIONS
MAHARASTRA RULES NOTIFICAITONS
47/2018
46/2018
45/2018
44/2018
GUJARAT RULES NOTIFICATIONS
51/2018
Seeks to bring into effect section 52 of the GGST Act (Provisions related to TCS) From 01102018
49/2018
10th Amendment in GGST Rules 2017
KERALA CIRCULARS
Circular 21/ 2018
Filling of Annual Return and Financial Statements for the period from April, 2017 to june, 2017 - Instruction issued
Circular 19/2018
Benami GST Registration - measures to prevent evasion of tax instructions issued
ARTICLES
Refund of Integrated tax paid on goods exported - retro amendment again
Understanding Income Tax Assessment Procedure
