FLASH NEWS
GST - J&K Govt finds huge gap between compliance level and its share in total shares of States in GST collections; launches Inspection Drive
GST HIGH COURT CASE
2018-TIOL-179-HC-AHM-GST
Aap And Company Vs UoI
CGST - Press Release dated 18.10.2018 - Availment of ITC in respect of any invoice or debit note for supply of goods or services or both after the due date of furnishing of return u/s 39 for the month of September following the end of FY to which such invoice or invoice relating to such debit note pertains or furnishing of the relevant Annual return, whichever is earlier - Petitioner submitting that sub-section (4) of section 16 of the Act contemplates furnishing of return u/s 39 therefor which is in Form GSTR-3 whereas Form GSTR-3B is to be furnished in circumstances as contemplated u/s 61(5) of the CGST Rules and, therefore, the aforesaid Press Release is contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules.
Held: Having regard to the submissions advanced, Notice to be issued returnable on 9th January 2019: High Court
- Notice issued: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
GST NAA CASES
2018-TIOL-16-NAA-GST + Case Story
Pushpak Chauhan Vs Harish Bakers And Confectioners Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 7, 2018)
CGST - Anti-Profiteering - Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 - Reduction in GST rates w.e.f 15.11.2017 - Base prices of Nestle Munch Nuts Chocolate and Cadbury Dairy Milk Chocolate increased to retain the original Maximum Retail Prices - Profiteering proved - benefit of tax reduction not passed on to customers - amount of profiteering has to include the amount of additional profit margin and the additional tax charged by the Respondent as both of them had been illegally charged by him - Profiteered amount to be deposited in to the Consumer Welfare fund along with interest within three months - issuing incorrect invoices is an offence under Section 122(1)(i) of the Act, hence respondent liable for imposition of penalty under the said Section r/w Rule 133(3)(d) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and for which a SCN is required to be issued - DGAP directed to conduct further investigation in respect of the sales made by the Respondent after the period 31.03.2018 to assess the amount of profiteering made by the Respondent and submit report accordingly: National Anti-Profiteering Authority
- Matter disposed of: NAA
GST AAR CASES
2018-TIOL-302-AAR-GST
Cable Corporation Of India Ltd
CGST - Applicant seeks an advance ruling as to whether the supply of transportation services, rendered by the applicant will be exempt from the levy of GST in terms of Sl. No. 18 of Notification 12/2017-CTR.
Held: It is observed that the applicant is not transporting the goods but is hiring the services of a GTA to undertake the transportation of goods by road and is claiming to be discharging GST liability under Reverse charge mechanism and in such a situation he is a recipient of such service and is not a supplier thereof - further, it is found that the first contract referred to includes ex-works supply of all equipments and materials which includes testing and supply of cable package required for successful commissioning -the second contract consists of all other activities required to be performed for commissioning the project which also includes transportation, insurance etc. - in view thereof, there is no doubt that both these contracts are in the nature of ‘Composite supply of Works Contract' which is a service and would be taxable @18% in terms of Sl. No. 3(ii) of Notification 11/2017-CTR and artificial bifurcation of contracts and scope of work to go out of the scope of correct tax liability is not legal and proper - exemption claimed by applicant in terms of Sl. No. 18 of Notification 12/2017-CTR cannot extended: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-301-AAR-GST
Sonkamal Enterprises Pvt Ltd
CGST - Applicant seeks a ruling as to whether the procedure to raise invoice from Mumbai Head Office for imports received at Haldia Port, Kolkata, 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 West Bengal.
Held: 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 from their GSTIN issued in Mumbai, Maharashtra -Since applicant has no establishment or place of operation or any godown or GSTIN in the State of West Bengal i.e. port of import, therefore, exbonding of imported goods from the Customs warehouse at Kolkata and for further sales after exbonding, whether that would be interstate or intrastate supply would depend upon the place of supply of goods as per sections 10 & 11 of the IGST Act, 2017 - Place from where the applicant makes a taxable supply of goods shall be his location, in this case, the Mumbai Head Office and since the applicant does not have any godown in the State of West Bengal, the applicant can clear the goods on the basis of invoices issued by Mumbai Head Office and need not take a separate registration in the State of West Bengal - they can, therefore, do further transaction mentioning the GSTIN of their Mumbai HO in the E-way bill and despatch place as Customs Warehouse, Kolkata: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-300-AAR-GST
Segoma Imaging Technologies India Pvt Ltd
CGST - Segoma India takes photos of diamonds and uploads photos on software of Segoma, Israel - Segoma, Israel is also a subsidiary of R2Net based in USA and as per the agreement between R2Net and its customers, R2Net lists on the system only those diamonds that are photographed with R2Net Display technology - As per the terms of the agreement, customers of R2Net send their diamonds and or gem stones to be photographed to Segoma India who issues memo of receipt of diamonds to customers of R2Net - Applicant claims that this transaction between Segoma, India and Segoma, Israel of providing photography services is a zero rated export supply within the meaning of s.16 of the IGST Act and exempt from levy of tax.
Held: There is no need that the goods physically required for rendering services must be owned by the recipient of the services - on the other hand, it is sufficient for the recipient to make them physically available to the service provider for rendering services - in this case, the event of photography services pertaining to diamonds made physically available by the recipient of services to the provider of services is over and the service is clearly provided in India where the services are actually performed - all the conditions stipulated in section 2(6) of the IGST Act are to be simultaneously complied with in order to consider any services as export of services - since conditions (iii) and (iv) have not been complied with, impugned supply is not “export of service' within the scope of section 2(6) of the IGST Act - as location of the supplier of service is in Mumbai and the place of supply as determined as per provisions of section 13(3) of the IGST Act is also in Mumbai, a place where the services are actually performed, the services are to be treated as intra state supply in terms of section 8(2) of the IGST Act and liable to tax under the provisions of MGST Act and CGST Act - supply of ‘photography service' is liable to SGST under the MGST and CGST Acts: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-299-AAR-GST
Lions Club Of Poona Kothrud
CGST - Club is not formed to provide any supply of goods or services to its members qua the fees received from them - There being no supply qua the fees received, there arises no occasion to visit the definition of “Supply” under the GST Act - Applicant club, as per the facts put up, does not render any “Supply” for the purposes of the GST Act - Registration not required: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-298-AAR-GST
Leena Power Tech Engineers Pvt Ltd
CGST - Applicant, upon successful bidding, have been awarded by CIDCO the contracts of Power Supply Infrastructure Development Work at Rehabilitation and Resettlement Pockets under Navi Mumbai International Airport (NMIA) Projects, Navi Mumbai for the project affected people of NMIA & Development of power supply infrastructure distribution network including construction of 33KV substation equipment & allied electrical works etc. - CIDCO is covered under the definition of the term ‘Government Entity' as per notification 31/2017-CTR - Concessional rate of tax @12% would be applicable in respect of supply of goods/services after coming into effect of notifiation 31/2017-CTR: AAR
Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-297-AAR-GST
Emco Ltd
CGST - Supply of Towers and Transmission line Products; Services Contract - Applicant seeks an advance ruling as to whether GST is leviable on the transportation charges levied by the applicant on Power Grid Corporation of India Limited; as to whether they are entitled to exemption in terms of Sl. No.18of Notification 12/2017-CTR.
Held: Subject contracts are for commissioning of immovable property wherein transfer of property in goods is involved in the execution of said contracts - contracts are clearly covered by the definition of Works Contract as per section 2(119) of the CGST Act - composite supplies in the nature of works contract is declared as supply of services as per section 7 r/w Entry no. 6(a) of the Schedule II of the CGST Act - Impugned supply of transportation service is not supply of standalone service - Accordingly, applicant is liable to pay GST @18% as per Entry at Sr. no. 3(ii) of Notification 11/2017-CTR and corresponding notification under MGST Act - inasmuch as GST is leviable on the transportation charges levied by applicant on PGCIL: AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
2018-TIOL-296-AAR-GST
Compo Advice India Pvt Ltd
CGST – Disc Brakes Pads (DBP) are correctly classifiable under chapter heading 8708 and not under 6813 - would be liable to tax @28% (14% each under CGST & MGST Act): AAR
- Application disposed of: AAR
ARTICLE
GST - Agenda for the second year - Part XV
