Like TIOL on Facebook Follow TIOL on TwitterSubscriber TIOL on YouTube

2021-TIOL-NEWS-198| August 21, 2021

Dear Member,

Sending following links.

Warm Regards,
TIOL Content Team


TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED.

For assistance please call us at + 91 7838594749 or email us at helpdesk@tiol.in.
TIOL Mail Update
INCOME TAX

2021-TIOL-1363-ITAT-BANG

ACIT Vs Everglades

Whether for making addition u/s 153C, documents found in search should be incriminating but there is no such requirement for initiating proceedings u/s 153C – YES: ITAT

- Assessee's Appeal dismissed: BANGALORE ITAT

2021-TIOL-1362-ITAT-DEL

Addl.CIT Vs CL Educate Ltd

Whether when no exempt income is earned/received by assessee in a particular AY, no disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D can be made – YES: ITAT

- Revenue's Appeal dismissed: DELHI ITAT

2021-TIOL-1361-ITAT-MAD

Jaya Educational Trust Vs DCIT

Whether interest-free loans given to consultant as per terms of employment can be equated with loan given without interest/security to persons referred to u/s 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) to deny benefit of exemption u/s 11 – NO: ITAT

- Assessee's Appeals allowed: CHENNAI ITAT

2021-TIOL-1360-ITAT-PUNE

Adarniya P D Patilsaheb Sahakari Bank Ltd Vs ACIT

Whether taxation of provisions for Bad and Doubtful Debts Recoverable in the current AY is permitted, where the same provisions have been taxed in the preceding AY - NO: ITAT

- Assessee's appeal allowed: PUNE ITAT

 
GST CASE

2021-TIOL-1728-HC-KAR-GST

Badiger Raghavendra Vs Asstt. CCT

GST - The petitioner, a 'registered supplier' under section 22 r/w section 26 of CGST Act, 2017 is grieving as to non-consideration of his Revocation Applications wherein he has sought for rescinding of "Order for cancellation of registration dated 23.07.2019" - A Writ of Mandamus issues directing the respondents to consider and cause to be considered subject Revocation Applications of petitioner in terms of Sec. 30 of the Act within a period of six weeks - The respondents shall pay to the petitioner a sum of Rs.1,000/- per day for the delay brooked in taking the call on subject applications, apart from they running the risk of being hauled up for contempt: HC

- Writ petition allowed: KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

2021-TIOL-203-AAR-GST

Rajkot Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd

GST - State Govt. announced "Atma Nirbhar Gujarat Sahay Yojna" wherein Nagarik Sahakari Banks  and credit co-operative societies were to provide loans without securities up to Rs. 1 lacs to customers charging 8% interest - Out of this 8% interest, 2% interest portion was to be paid by the customer and remaining 6% interest portion was borne by the State Government - A pplicant has submitted that after disbursement of loan to the beneficiaries, they had forwarded the claim for incentive through the office of District Registrar, Co-operative Society, Rajkot and after considering the said claim, the Govt. of Gujarat has sanctioned incentive to the tune of Rs.9,24,28,936/- - A pplicant has submitted that the "subsidy" received in the form of "incentive" cannot be considered as consideration under the provisions of Section 2(31) of CGST Act and, therefore, not chargeable to GST.

Held: Incentive specifically provided to the applicant is for motivation and encouragement for the applicant to undertake this specific scheme - By this incentive, the State Government is incentivising the applicant to undertake this scheme and achieve success, for the incentive is not absolute but relative depending on the performance of the applicant - As the incentive is linked to the Amount of Loan disbursed in rupees, the yardstick for incentivising the applicant is based on applicants willingness and performance to achieve targets, which in subject case is the amounts of loan disbursed, the highest incentive being 4% for more than 100 Crore rupees disbursed and the minimum being 2% for upto 10 crore rupees of loan disbursed - Applicant's business performance of loan disbursement is the sole criteria for receiving subject incentive - The said incentive @4% on the disbursed loan amount to the applicant has not lessened the burden of the customers, for the customers of the loan are still required to pay their share of 2% interest on the loan amount -  This incentive amount falls under the meaning of consideration and income received by the applicant - In GST law, no special treatment is to be given to incentives given by Government - Government is treated as any other 'person' in GST law, but for relevant Notifications issued - Held that the said income of incentive of 4% received by the applicant is consideration to the applicant - Such incentive cannot be equated as subsidy granted by the Government - Further held that subsidy is granted in public interest, related with welfare of the public or provided to a person/business by Governments, to rationalise the cost impact directly/indirectly on the public - Said incentive has no such bearing on reducing the interest burden of 2% on the customers of the applicant, but incentivising the applicant for its performance of business in said scheme - In the present case, incentive amount is received by the applicant and the applicant itself is benefitted, said benefit of incentive is not shared with its customers - The incentive amount is not passed on to the customer who are getting loan - Therefore, subject incentive amount is liable to GST - The said Incentive is not subsidy and does not merit exclusion from valuation under section 15(2)(e) CGST Act - The subject supply is covered at section 7(1)(a) CGST Act and not covered at section 7(2) CGST Act: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-202-AAR-GST

Sadanand Manpower Service

GST - Labour supply/supply of manpower services like Drivers, peons, housekeeping, data entry operators and other clerical staff to Government Departments is covered under Service Accounting Code (SAC) 9985 and attracts tax at the rate of 18% since these services are not provided by way of any activity in relation to any function entrusted to a Panchayat under article 243G of the Constitution or in relation to any function entrusted to a Municipality under article 243W of the Constitution: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-201-AAR-GST

Starworth Infrastructure And Construction Ltd

GST - Construction service provided by the applicant to M/s. Provident Housing Limited under the projects "Provident Neora and Provident Capella" and to M/s. Puravankara Limited under the project "Provident Parksquare" are liable to tax at the rate of 12% as provided in Sl.No.3-Item (v)-sub item (da) of Notification No. 11/2017-CTR if the projects are affordable housing projects and are given the infrastructure status as per notification of Government of India, in Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs vide F.No. 13/6/2009-INF, dated the 30th March, 2017, else, the services will be liable to tax at the rate of 18% as provided in Sl.No.3-Item (xii) of Notification No. 11/2017-CTR : AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-200-AAR-GST

Premier Sales Prmotion Pvt Ltd

GST - Supply of Vouchers [gift vouchers, cashback vouchers, e-vouchers] are taxable as "goods" and the time of supply would be governed by Section 12(5) of the CGST Act 2017 - Rate of tax is 18% as per Entry No. 453 of Schedule 3 of Notification No. 1/2017-CTR: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-199-AAR-GST

Inox Air Products Pvt Ltd

GST - SIPCOT had entered into an agreement with India Pistons Limited (IPL) for lease of an area of land in Hosur for a period of 99 years - Applicant INOX had approached IPL for transfer of the leasehold rights for the remainder period of 72 years in respect of part of the property for setting up Air Separation Unit (ASU) for manufacture and supply of Industrial gases.; INOX and IPL entered into a Memorandum of Understanding for transfer of leasehold rights (MOU) - Accordingly, SIPCOT has amended its original lease agreement in order to lease the part property to INOX - IPL has agreed to transfer the leasehold rights in the part property to INOX for a total consideration of Rs.15,00,00,000/- - INOX has stated that IPL has sought an Advance Ruling on whether the transfer of leasehold rights in the part property amounts to supply and accordingly whether GST would be leviable on the consideration receivable from INOX; that in the event where the authority rules that the transfer of leasehold rights to INOX is a supply and leviable to GST, they require to understand the admissibility of Input Tax Credit (ITC) of GST chargeable on such supply.

Held:   Service received from IPL is towards facilitating the lease acquisition of the land by the applicant, therefore, the ASU, even if it qualifies as a 'Plant and Machinery',  the 'land' leased is not a 'Plant and Machinery' because of the explicit, specific exclusion provided in the GST Law in the Explanation to 'Plant and Machinery' - The services availed from IPL is in relation to acquiring lease of the land - By the specific exclusion in the definition of 'Plant and Machinery' as "land" stands excluded from 'Plant and Machinery', the services availed and utilized for acquiring such land on lease is restricted under Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act 2017, though the activity is in the course or furtherance of the business of the applicant - Credit of GST, if payable, on such supply is not eligible as credit to the applicant: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2021-TIOL-198-AAR-GST

TVL Anamallais Engineering Pvt Ltd

GST - Activity of bus body building undertaken on the chassis supplied by customers amounts to supply of service as per Schedule II, clause 3 of CGST Act 2017 -  Service is classifiable under SAC 998881 and  applicable rate will be CGST @ 9% and SGST @ 9% as per entry no.26 of Notification no. 11/2017-CTR and corresponding State notification: AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

 
INDIRECT TAX

2021-TIOL-1727-HC-MAD-CUS

Pavan Enterprises Vs Pr.CC

Cus - The petitioner sought a mandamus directing the respondents to finalise provisional assessments in respect of Bills of Entry filed by petitioner for clearance of goods imported by petitioner accepting the classification under CTH 23065020 and return the bank guarantees furnished at the time of provisional assessment - The court had on 09.04.2021 recorded the statement of respondents to the effect that the representation of petitioner, seeking finalisation of provisional assessment, has been received and that the representation would be disposed prior to 14.06.2021 - Time was sought for finalisation and an extension of four weeks was granted - On 14.07.2021, since the matter was still hanging fire, some more time was granted putting the respondents to terms which have been complied with - Provisional assessment has been finalised in line with classification declared by petitioner in the bills of entry in question - The mandamus sought for thus stands achieved: HC

- Writ petition closed: MADRAS HIGH COURT

2021-TIOL-1726-HC-MAD-CX

Ambadi Enterprises Ltd Vs Department of Revenue MoF

CX - The petitioner is challenging O-I-O dated 04.12.2020 - This is not a matter that would justify intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Admittedly, due opportunity has been provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order - The petitioner, however was more inclined to pursue the Writ Appeal and thus did not avail of the opportunity that was extended - Incidentally, the Writ Appeal has also come to be dismissed by order of Division Bench dated 01.02.2021 - Thus, the petitioner is relegated to alternate remedy, if it so desires - If an appeal challenging the impugned order is filed within a period of eight weeks, the same shall be taken on file by the respondents without reference to limitation, but ensuring compliance with all other statutory conditions: HC

- Writ petition dismissed: MADRAS HIGH COURT

2021-TIOL-489-CESTAT-BANG

Astrazeneca India Pvt Ltd Vs CCT

ST - The appeal is directed against impugned order whereby Commissioner (A) has rejected the refund claim on the ground of limitation as interpreted in Section 11B of CEA, 1944 - Originally refund application was filed on 17.7.2007 which was partially allowed to the extent of Rs.3,85,681/- and thereafter, Commissioner (A) has allowed refund claim on certain input services viz., ‘Security Services' and ‘Clearing and Forwarding Charges' - Thereafter, CESTAT vide Final Order dated 16.7.2014 has allowed the appeal and set aside the order rejecting the refund claim which was not challenged by Department and it has attained finality - After three months of decision of Tribunal, appellant filed a letter requesting the department to grant refund but instead of granting refund, Assistant Commissioner asked the appellant to file fresh refund application along with documents which was not required at all because it is a settled law that application for refund need not be made at every stage of adjudication process of an original refund claim and there is no express provision in CCR, 2004 for filing of subsequent application and further, the relevant date as per Section 11B(2) of CEA, 1944 applies only to first application of refund claim and this issue has been considered by Tribunal in case of BASF India Ltd. 2021-TIOL-172-CESTAT-BANG - The refund claims to the appellant is allowed - As far as demand of interest for delayed refund is concerned, issue is squarely covered by decision of Apex court in case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. 2011-TIOL-105-SC-CX wherein it is held that interest on delayed refund under Section 11BB is payable on expiry of three months from the date of receipt of application under Section 11B(1) and not from the date of the order of refund or appellate order allowing such refund - Hence, appellant is entitled for interest: CESTAT

- Appeal allowed: BANGALORE CESTAT

2021-TIOL-488-CESTAT-MUM

Ceat Ltd Vs CCE

CX - The appellant, a manufacturers of tyres and tubes was availing credit of duty paid on nylon cord fabrics purchased by them and used in manufacture of tyres - Notfn 5/94-CE was amended vide Notfn 08/94-CE so as to permit availment of modvat credit of Additional Excise Duty only for utilization towards payment of excise duty leviable under Additional Duty of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 on final products - The said position continued even after the introduction of CCR, 2002 until the amendment to Rule 3(6)(b) of CCR, 2002 by Notfn 13/03- CE by which restriction regarding utilization of credit of AED (GSI) for payment of AED (GSI) only was removed and AED credit could be utilized for payment of other type of excise duty such as BED and SED - Cenvat credit availed prior to 01.04.2000 was not available for utilization towards payment of BED and SED on the final products - The appellant paid AED (GSI) credit utilized and then simultaneously availed credit which the Revenue finds to be inadmissible and is, therefore, a SCN was issued - The issue is no longer res-integra - In appellant's own case, same issue has been decided holding in their favour - This order of Tribunal was upheld by Bombay High Court - Following the order of CESTAT and Bombay High Court, the Commissioner has dropped all the pending SCNs on the same ground - In view of said decision, no merits found in impugned order, same is set aside: CESTAT

- Appeal allowed: MUMBAI CESTAT

 

 

Download on the App Store
Get it on Google play

 


NEWS FLASH

COVID-19: Global daily death count remains at 10,000 + US goes beyond 1.47 lakh with daily deaths beyond 1000 + UK reports over 37K new cases

White House goes slow on proposal to impose carbon border tax on imports from China

Britain may put spanner in spoke in Nvidia acquiring chipmaker Arm's

China hails Taliban; faces backlash at home

Biden nominates R Nicholas Burns as Ambassador to China + Rahm Emanuel as Ambassador to Japan

World Bank shifts Kabul staff to Pakistan + UK to offer vaccines to Afghan shelter-seekers

Zydus Cadila vaccine gets official nod to make debut

 
TOP NEWS

Govt reviews Islanding Schemes for Power Sector against major outage

EPFO adds 12.8 lakh net subscribers in June month

NEP to transform educational institutions into world-class institutions: Minister

Committee set up for quadrupling exports of handlooms

 
TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED.
TIOL HOUSE, 490, Udyog Vihar, Phase - V,
Gurgaon, Haryana - 122001, INDIA
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