Like TIOL on Facebook Follow TIOL on Twitter Subscriber TIOL on YouTube

2021-TIOL-NEWS-008| January 09, 2021

Dear Member,

Sending following links.

Warm Regards,
TIOL Content Team


TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED.

For assistance please call us at + 91 850 600 0282 or email us at helpdesk@tiol.in.
TIOL Mail Update

INCOME TAX

2021-TIOL-71-HC-AHM-IT

All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants Vs UoI

In writ, the High Court relies of judgments passed by this very court in two other matters, and directs the CBDT to consider the petitioners' application for date extension. It also underscores that CBDT's powers are beneficial in nature & must be exercised for proper administration of fiscal laws, without causing hardship to tax payers. Hence it also posts the matter for hearing on Jan 13, 2021.

-Writ petition allowed :GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2021-TIOL-70-HC-P&H-IT

JV Steel Traders Vs Addl CIT

On appeal, the High Court observes the assessee's request seeking unconditional withdrawal of the appeal and permits the same.

- Appeal disposed of: PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

2021-TIOL-69-HC-MAD-IT

Centre for Individual & Corporate Vs ACIT

On appeal, the High Court observes the assessee's intent to seek settlement of the matter under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020. Hence the Court finds no reason to keep the present appeal pending. It also directs the Competent Authority to consider the assessee's application under the Scheme & pass order expeditiously.

- Assessee's appeal disposed of: MADRS HIGH COURT

2021-TIOL-68-HC-DEL-IT

Ram Avtar Goyal Vs MoF

In writ, the High Court directs that notice be issued to the parties and also directs the Respondent to decide upon the petitioner's representation within two weeks' time.

- Writ petition disposed of: DELHI HIGH COURT

2021-TIOL-58-ITAT-DEL

Krish Impex Pvt Ltd Vs ITO

Whether re-assessment proceedings can be sustained where based solely on report of the Investigation Wing & not involving any independent application of mind by the AO - NO: ITAT

- Assessee's appeal allowed: DELHI ITAT

2021-TIOL-57-ITAT-DEL

Druzbha Overseas Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT

Whether when assessee has not debited the amount of cost of land in P&L account nor claimed any deduction in respect of cost of land by way of computation, provisions contained u/s 40A(3) are not attracted - YES: ITAT

- Assessee's appeal allowed: DELHI ITAT

2021-TIOL-56-ITAT-MUM

Arihant Traders Vs ACIT

Whether the provisions of Section 40A(3) r/w Rule 6DD(e) can be so applied in a manner which restricts business activities - NO: ITAT

Whether the provisions of Section 40A(3) are applicable on payments made for acquiring stock-in-trade & other material & cannot be applied onto payments made for procuring agricultural produce - YES: ITAT

- Assessee's appeal allowed: MUMBAI ITAT

2021-TIOL-55-ITAT-MUM

DCIT Vs Almega Paints Pvt Ltd

Whether addition u/s 68 can be made on the ingenuineness of the transactions when the assessee has discharged the initial onus of establishing identity, creditworthiness of the parties and genuineness of the transaction - NO: ITAT

- Revenue's appeal dismissed: MUMBAI ITAT

2021-TIOL-54-ITAT-AHM

ACIT Vs El Dorado Biotech Pvt Ltd

Whether addition u/s 68 can be made when assessee's cross examination request was denied by the AO - NO: ITAT

- Revenue's appeal dismissed: AHMEDABAD ITAT

 
GST CASES

2021-TIOL-09-AAR-GST

Uday Laxman Jadhav

GST - Services provided  of  (i) Refining of gold from old jewellery and coins/biscuits, and  (ii) Conversion of old gold jewellery into coins/biscuits as per specification given by service recipient  will be covered under the definition of Job work under Section 2(68) of CGST Act, 2017 only when provided to registered person and not as Job work when provided to un-registered person - Such services merit classification under SAC 9988 -  The rate of GST for the above service provided to registered person is 5% in terms of Sr. No. 26(i)(c) of Notification No. 11/2017-CTR - The rate of GST for the above service provided to un-registered person is 18% in terms of Sr. No. 26 (iv) of Notification No. 11/2017-CTR : AAR

GST - Services of testing of purity of gold is classifiable 9983 and GST rate is 18% in terms of Sr. No. 21 of Notification No. 11/2017-CTR : AAR 

GST - Service of refining of old gold jewellery or coins/ biscuit as well as testing of purity of gold will be covered under Mixed supply in terms of Section 2(74) of CGST Act, 2017 - The GST rate would be 18%: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-08-AAR-GST

Spx Flow Technology India Pvt Ltd

GST - AAR - Precedent - A s per Section 103 of the CGST Act, 2017, the Advance Ruling pronounced by the Authority or the Appellate Authority shall be binding only on the applicant who had sought it and on the officer  concerned  or the jurisdictional officer in respect of the  applicant  concerned  and, therefore, cannot be relied upon by the applicant in the instant case: AAR

GST - Company is engaged in the business of manufacture of goods like pumps designed for handling water, single and multi-stage pumps designed for handling water, single and multi- stage pumps, dairy machine etc. falling under Chapter 84 and other such products which are classifiable under Chapter 84 of the GST Tariff - The applicant also carries out business of trading in such goods - A pplicant's parent company located in Poland is engaged in shipping goods such as spare parts of dairy machinery to recipient customer company located in Bangladesh - The transaction involves generation of one invoice by M/s. SPX Flow Technology, Poland to the applicant and generation of another invoice by the applicant on the recipient company which is located in Bangladesh - R ecipient customer company in Bangladesh which is M/s. BRAC Dairy and Food Project, receives such dairy machinery and its spare parts directly from SPX Flow Technology, Poland - In other words, the goods are directly delivered from Poland to the customer located at Dhaka on CIF basis - While undertaking this transaction, the invoices are generated parallel to each other, whereby M/s. SPX Flow Technology, Poland raises a set of invoices to SPX Flow Technology India P vt. Ltd. (applicant) and at the same point of time, the applicant company raises another set of invoice to M/s. BRAC Dairy and Food Project, Bangladesh -  Applicant states that from the combined reading of the relevant provisions of the IGST Act, Customs Tariff Act and the Customs Act, it comes out that IGST can be levied and collected only when the duties of customs are assessed on the imported goods and on the duty that is determined under Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962; that in the present case, the goods are not crossing the customs frontiers of India and, therefore, the goods cannot be considered as ‘imported goods' for the purpose of levy of customs duty and also for the levy of IGST on such goods and, therefore, in the present case, IGST cannot be levied on this transaction under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 considering such transaction to be a transaction of import of goods - Applicant has, therefore, sought a ruling on the following questions viz.  Whether the activity undertaken by the applicant is covered by Entry No.7 in Schedule 3 of the CGST Act, 2017? Whether the applicant is liable to pay IGST on out and out transactions taking place beyond the Customs frontiers of India?

Held:  From a combined reading of the provisions of the IGST Act, 2017 [section 2(10), 7(2), 5(1)], the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 [section 3(7)], and the Customs Act, 1962 [sections 12, 15], it is evident that the 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 and on the date determined as per provisions of Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962 - In the instant case, it is an undisputed fact that the supply involves movement of goods and, therefore, the place of supply would be the termination for delivery to the recipient - The goods under consideration are supplied to overseas buyers as declared by the applicant and as such the place of supply will be a place outside India - Further, the supplier is the applicant who has declared the principal place of business within India and issues the invoices for sale of such goods -  The above indicates that the supplier is located in India and the place of supply is outside India and as such the same would be Inter-state supply in terms of the provisions of Section 7(5) of IGST Act, 2017 - Thus, it is very clear that the transaction undertaken by the applicant tantamount to supply and is an Inter-state supply - It is obvious that IGST will be leviable unless the goods are exempted or are zero-rated supplies which have been defined as export of goods or services in terms of the provisions of Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017 -  In the instant case, the goods have not crossed the Indian customs frontier and as such it is clear that the goods are not physically available in the Indian territory - When the goods are not physically available in the Indian territory, the question of taking goods out of India does not arise - Thus, the subject transaction does not qualify as export of goods - In view of the above, it appears that the transaction is covered under the ambit of Inter-state supply and is neither exempted nor covered under export of goods or services, thus, the theory of elimination takes us to the conclusion that such supplies will be subject to levy of IGST - However,  vide Central Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Act, 2018, Schedule-III of the CGST Act, 2017 (which covers activities or transactions which shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services) has been amended with effect from 01.02.2019 (as per Notification No.02/2019-Central Tax dated 29.01.2019) and entries 7 [ Supply of goods from a place in the non-taxable territory to another place in the non-taxable territory without such goods entering into India ] and 8 have been inserted under the said Schedule - I n view of the amendment in Schedule-III of the CGST Act, 2017, supply of goods from a place in the non-taxable territory to another place in the non-taxable territory without such goods entering into India shall be treated neither as a supply of goods nor a supply of services with effect from 01.02.2019 - Since in the instant case, the supply of goods takes place from Poland (which is a non-taxable territory) directly to Bangladesh (which is also a non-taxable territory) without the said goods entering into India, the transactions mentioned in the instant case are similar to that as mentioned in Entry No.7 of Schedule-III of the CGST Act, 2017 - Therefore, in view of the facts mentioned above, Authority concludes that no GST is leviable on such type of transactions which have taken place with effect from 01.02.2019 and onwards: AAR

Conclusion:

GST - A ctivity undertaken by the applicant M/s. SPX Flow Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad is covered under Entry No.7 in Schedule 3 of the CGST Act, 2017 in respect of the transactions undertaken for the period from 01.02.2019 onwards -  Applicable IGST is payable on goods sold to customer located outside India, where goods are shipped directly from the vendor's premises (located outside India) to the customer's premises (located outside India) for such transactions effected upto 31.01.2019 - However, no IGST is payable on such transactions effected from 01.02.2019 onwards: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-07-AAR-GST

Jay Chemical Industries Ltd

GST - s.16(1) of Act, 2017 - Company is required to reverse input tax credit on inputs consumed in dye intermediates (which is also a finished goods) where such goods have been destroyed in fire - And so also, ITC taken on input services used in or in relation to manufacture or production of said goods - Inputs and capital goods cannot be said to have been used in course of furtherance of business as the finished goods have been destroyed in fire: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-06-AAR-GST

Capital Commercial Cooperative Service Society Ltd

GST - Applicant is a registered commercial co-operative society providing services of maintenance of common facilities/amenities for members - they have collected money from their members under the following heads viz. Monthly maintenance fees (recurring basis) and Common maintenance fund/deposit (one-time basis) - Applicant seeks a ruling as to whether they are liable to pay GST on the common maintenance fund/deposit collected from their members and if yes, what shall be considered as the time of supply for such transaction.

Held: Applicant is a registered entity as an Association of Persons and has a legal existence separate from its members - The applicant is collecting the amounts towards "Common Maintenance Fund (Deposit)" @ Rs.250/- per square foot of built-up area for future supply of services viz. maintenance, repair etc. of the common amenities, facilities, services, conveniences, utilities and common infrastructure of the Scheme meant for its members - It is a fact that the Common Maintenance Fund (Deposit) is mandatory under the Bye-laws of the Co-operative Societies/Resident Welfare Associations and is in the nature of a non-returnable deposit towards unforeseen events or planned events - Such deposit is never to be returned to the members, but same along with its interest will be used as and when required in future for maintenance, repair etc. of the common amenities, facilities, services, conveniences, utilities and common infrastructure of the Scheme meant for its members - Thus, the applicant, in addition to maintenance charges, also collected amount as Common Maintenance Fund (Deposit) from their members which is non-returnable - Since, the said amount is collected as non-returnable common maintenance fund, such deposits can be considered for such supply of service as mentioned above and, hence, will be liable to tax - It is worthwhile to mention that the applicant themselves stated in the application that sometimes, maintenance deposit standing in the name of the person who is leaving this society shall get transferred to new person who is coming in as new member of this society in his place - Thus, in this case, said deposit is also not refunded but is transferred into account of new member by making accounting entry - In the instant case, the common maintenance fund/deposit so collected is the amount collected towards the future supply of service of maintenance, repair etc. and accordingly, gets applied as consideration towards supply of services only at the time of actual supply of services - Therefore, the amount collected towards the common maintenance fund/deposit do not form part of consideration towards supply of services at the time of collection, however, the amounts so utilized for provision of service are liable to GST at the time of actual supply of service: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-05-AAR-GST

Gujarat Plast Industries

GST - Narrow woven fabrics of polyester yarn of a width not exceeding 30 cm but not provided with selvedges (flat or tubular) on both edges manufactured by applicant is classifiable under CSH 5407 1019 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and attracts GST @5%, Sr. no. 217, Schedule I of 1/2017-CTR : AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-04-AAR-GST

Sagar Powertex Pvt Ltd

GST - Supplier of the service is the applicant and the service recipient is M/s UKIL Machinery Co. Ltd., Republic of Korea - Services provided by the applicant are in the nature of services of commission agents or commodity brokers who negotiate between buyers and sellers as a facilitator for the supply of goods for which they are paid a fee or commission - The said service can also be called as 'intermediary services' - Services provided by the applicant is 'Intermediary services' and appears at sub-section 8(b) of Section 13 of the IGST Act, 2017 - Also, sub-section (8) clearly mentions that the place of supply in respect of the services described under sub-section shall be the location of the supplier of services - Supplier in the instant case is the applicant and the location of the said supplier is in Gujarat - Since the location of the applicant, who is supplier of services, is in Gujarat and both the supplier of service as well as the place of supply of service is in Gujarat, the supply of services would be considered akin to intra-state supply of services and would be liable to CGST and SGST as per s.9(1) of the Act, 2017: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-03-AAR-GST

Shri Sai Pest Control  

GST - Fumigation service provided in a Customs bonded warehouse of agriculture produce is classifiable under SAC 99853 and taxable @18% in view of Entry no. 23(ii) of 11/2017-CTR - such service of fumigation provided for exported and imported agriculture produce is not covered under Sl. No. 54(h) of 12/2017-CTR - in view of the absence of any facts on record, Authority is not in a position to conclude that the custom bonded warehouse are used exclusively only for storage of agriculture product and are not used for storage of non-agriculture produce: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-02-AAR-GST

Gujarat Industrial Security Force Society

GST - Applicant M/s. Gujarat Industrial Security Force Society (GISFS) has to charge/pay GST @ 18% on the entire amount received by them from their clients, which includes the wages etc. to be paid to the Security Guards as well as the amount received from their clients as establishment charges to run their administration office and to cover their administration cost like administration staff salary, stationery, electricity of admin office etc. - Applicant would be eligible to take GST credit subject to the fulfilment of the conditions/provisions envisaged in the relevant sections and rules of the CGST Act, 2017 and the CGST Rules, 2017 respectively: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-01-AAR-GST

Bhadreshkumar Rameshchandra Dave

GST - Supply of labour (SAC 998519) attracts GST @18 in terms of Sr. no. 23 of 11/2017-CTR : AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

 
INDIRECT TAX

2021-TIOL-03-SC-NDPS-LB

Narcotics Control Bureau Regional Vs Nepal Singh Meena

NDPS - Order of bail was passed on 10.07.2019 and the appeal has been filed by the Narcotics Control Bureau, Regional Unit at Jodhpur after a delay of 405 days - The order is sought to be assailed on the ground that the High Court failed to consider the mandatory requirements of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Held: Bench has been repeatedly deprecating the practice of authorities coming before this Court after inordinate delays assuming as if the Law of Limitation does not apply to them -Reliance is placed on the judgments of vintage when technology was not easily available - Explanation given is hardly satisfactory and, in fact, is a saga of gross negligence on the part of the concerned officers for prosecuting the remedy - The dates set out in the application show that on 09.08.2019, a proposal to file the special leave petition was sent by the zone to the NCB Headquarters and the Headquarters asked for additional documents on 19.09.2019 - Thereafter, the documents were received on 14.10.2019 and a meeting was held on 17.02.2020 - Bench has been imposing costs for wasting judicial time in such matters which are filed with this oblique motive of saving the officers - Bench, therefore, imposes costs of Rs.25,000/- on the petitioner to be recovered from the officers concerned - The cost is to be deposited in Supreme Court Advocates on Record Welfare Fund within four weeks along with the certificate of recovery from the officers concerned - A copy of the order is to be placed before the Director General, NCB for remedial action as many cases of this kind are coming - It is made clear to the Director General that non-compliance of aforesaid direction would invite consequential proceedings against the Director General - The special leave petition is dismissed on the ground of delay: Supreme Court Larger Bench

- Petition dismissed : SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

2021-TIOL-30-CESTAT-DEL

CC Vs Hanuman Prasad & Sons

Cus - Both the importers Hanuman Prasad and Niraj Silk had declared the value of goods in Bills of Entry as 1.2 USD per kg. - The proper officer doubted the truth or accuracy of value declared by importer for the reason that contemporaneous data had a significantly higher value - It was open to the importers to require proper officer to intimate the grounds in writing for doubting the truth or accuracy of value declared by them and seek a reasonable opportunity of being heard, but they did not do so - On the other hand, the importers submitted in writing that though they had declared the value of imported goods at 1.20 USD per kg., but on being shown contemporaneous data, they have agreed that the value of goods should be enhanced to 1.80 USD per kg for Hanuman Prasad and to 1.94 USD per kg. for Niraj Silk - The importers also specifically stated that they did not want to avail of right conferred on them under section 124 of Customs Act and, therefore, they did not want any SCN to be issued to them or personal hearing to be provided to them - The importers also specifically stated that they did not want a speaking order to be passed on the Bills of Entry - It needs to be noted that section 124 of Customs Act provides for issuance of SCN and personal hearing, and section 17(5) of Customs Act requires a speaking order to be passed on Bills of Entry, except in a case where the importer/exporter confirms the acceptance in writing - The very fact that the importers had agreed for enhancement of declared value in letters submitted by them to the assessing authority, itself implies that the importers had not accepted the value declared by them in the Bills of Entry - The value declared in Bills of Entry, therefore, automatically stood rejected - Further, once the importers had accepted the enhanced value, it was really not necessary for the assessing authority to undertake the exercise of determining value of declared goods under provisions of Rules 4 to 9 of Valuation Rules - This is for the reason that it is only when the value of imported goods cannot be determined under rule 3(1) for the reason that the declared value has been rejected under sub rule 2, that the value of the imported goods is required to be determined by proceeding sequentially through rule 4 to 9 - It would be useful to refer to the decision of Tribunal in Advanced Scan Support Technologies 2015-TIOL-2383-CESTAT-DEL , wherein the Tribunal, after making reference to decision of the Tribunal in Guardian Plasticote Ltd. 2008-TIOL-119-CESTAT-KOL , held that as the Appellant therein had expressly given consent to the value proposed by Revenue and stated that it did not want any SCN or personal hearing, it was not necessary for Revenue to establish the valuation any further as consented value became the declared transaction value requiring no further investigation or justification - The Commissioner (A) was not justified in setting aside the orders passed by assessing officer on the Bills of Entry - Impugned orders are set aside: CESTAT

- Appeals allowed: DELHI CESTAT

2021-TIOL-26-CESTAT-CHD

Guru Hargobind Steel Industries Vs CCE & ST

CX - The issue arises for consideration is that whether the assessee is entitled to claim refund of cenvat credit lying unutilized in their cenvat credit account at the time of surrender of their registration under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 - The Tribunal in the case of M/s Shree Krishna Paper Mills & Ind. Ltd. 2018-TIOL-1657-CESTAT-CHD has observed that although this Tribunal has denied refund claim in case of Phoenix Inds Ltd 2014-TIOL-1981-CESTAT-MUM but the Regional Bench at Chandigarh is bound by the decision of High Court of Punjab & Haryana; therefore, relying on the decision of Rama Industries Ltd 2009-TIOL-100-HC-P&H-CX , it is held that the assessee is entitled for refund claim of unutilized cenvat credit lying in their cenvat credit account at the time of surrender of registration under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 - As regards to the issue of interest on delayed refund, the claim of interest by assessee during the course of arguments is a consequential relief, as it has been held that the assessee is entitled for refund, then they are entitled for interest also after three months of filing of refund claim - Assessee is entitled for interest in the light of decision of Apex Court in case of M/s Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd 2011-TIOL-105-SC-CX - The impugned order is set aside: CESTAT

- Appeal allowed: CHANDIGARH CESTAT

 

 

 

Download on the App Store
Get it on Google play

 

 


NEWS FLASH

COVID-19 - US reports over 3 lakh cases & 4000 deaths in last 24 hours

COVID-19 - Swedish Parliament passes law to impose lockdowns + Pfizer vaccine found to be efficacious against new variants

UK bans exports of newly-found COVID-19 drugs - tocilizumab & sarilumab, used for arthritis

Twitter decides to permanently suspend Trump's account

Govt, farmers' dialogue goes through another round of stalemate; Next meeting on Jan 15

 
TOP NEWS

Income Tax Department conducts searches in Kolkata

DGGI Gurugram arrests one for fraudulently availing input tax credit of Rs 8 crore

French President's top Advisor calls on PM

Sovereign Gold Bond price fixed at Rs 5,104 per gm

Economists urge PM Modi to push strong structural reforms

 
NOTIFICATION

dgft20pn037

Enlistment under Appendix 2E of M/s The All India Plastics Manufacturers' Association (North Zone), Gurugram Haryana - Authorized to issue Certificate of Origin (Non-Preferential)

 
ORDER

Order No 09/2020

CBDT issues local transfer order of 4 AC/DCs in Delhi

Order No 08/2021

CBDT grants ad hoc promotion to 177 officers to AC grade

 
TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED.
TIOL HOUSE, 490, Udyog Vihar, Phase - V,
Gurgaon, Haryana - 122001, INDIA
Board : +91 124-6427300
Fax: + 91 124-6427310
Web: https://taxindiaonline.com
Email: updates@tiol.in
__________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY/PROPRIETARY NOTE.
The Document accompanying this electronic transmission contains information from TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED., which is confidential, proprietary or copyrighted and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named on this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. This prohibition includes, without limitation, displaying this transmission or any portion thereof, on any public bulletin board. If you are not the intended recipient of this document, please return this document to TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED. immediately