I-T - No addition can be made in respect of completed assessment in absence of any incriminating material: SC

I-T - Penalty or Confiscation is 'proceeding in rem' and therefore, loss in pursuance to same is not available for deduction u/s 37 regardless of nature of business: SC

GST - Affiliation provided by Kota University to its constituent colleges for imparting education is not an exempted supply: AAR

GST - CRP Test Kit and HbA1c Test kit are classifiable under HSN Code 3002 and attract tax @5% - AAR order classifying under HSN Code 3822 set aside: AAAR

2023-TIOL-14-AAAR-GST

Accurex Biomedical Pvt Ltd

GST - Appellant had sought ruling in respect of the classification of the following two products viz. (A) Turbilatex CRP Infinite & (B) HbA1c Infinite, the word "Infinite" being the brand name of the Appellant - AAR has held that CRP kit and HbA1c kit do not fall under HSN code 3002 [as "Agglutinating Sera"] whereas the same are covered by HSN Code 3822 ["diagnostic kits and reagents"] - Aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.

Held: It is observed that CRP Test Kit, the impugned product, whose principal component is the latex particles coated with the anti-human CRP antibody obtained from the mice antisera, will aptly be construed as antisera - Accordingly, it will be classified under the Chapter Heading 30.02, and not under the Chapter Heading 38.22 owing to its description wherein it is categorically mentioned that a diagnostic or laboratory reagents which are not falling under the Chapter Heading 30.02 will be covered under the Chapter Heading 38.22 - Since it is beyond doubt that the agglutinating sera cannot be construed as medicine or drug, therefore, the same is bound to be considered in the nature of diagnostic kit - Therefore, the observation of the MAAR that the agglutinating sera mentioned under the said list 1 is an individual product and cannot be construed as diagnostic kit is not correct - Held that the impugned product will fall under entry "agglutinating sera" at SL No. 125 of the list I appended to the Schedule-I to the Notification No 01/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 - The said product, CRP Test Kit, will attract GST at the rate of 5% (CGST@2.5%+SGST@2.5%) in terms of the entry at SI. No. 180 of Schedule I to the Notification No. 01/2017-C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 - It is unequivocally clear that the second impugned product, i.e., HbA1c, is very similar to the first impugned product, i.e., CRP Test kit, in terms of its constitutionality and functionality, and hence all the reasoning and rationale used for classification of the first impugned product - i.e., CRP Test kit, will apply mutatis-mutandis to the second impugned product, i.e., HbA1c, too - Both the impugned products, i.e., CRP Test Kit and HbA1c Test kit, will be classified under chapter heading 3002, and accordingly, both the products will attract GST at the rate of 5% - Order of AAR set aside and appeal allowed: AAAR

- Appeal allowed: AAAR

2023-TIOL-58-AAR-GST

University of Kota

GST - Affiliation provided by Kota University to its constituent colleges for imparting education is a supply and taxable under GST - It is evident that the affiliation services provided by the applicant enables the said institution to conduct the course/programme and does not relate to admission of students to such course/programme in the said institutions or conduct of examination for such admission in the said institution - Also, the exempted services on the conduct of examination is that related to the admission to such institution and not related to the examination based on which degree/title, etc are conferred to the students, as is being claimed by the applicant - The amount collected by way of affiliation fees is, therefore, not exempted vide Sl. No. 66 Notification No.12/2017-CT (Rate) : AAR

- Application disposed of: AAR

2023-TIOL-42-SC-CUS

UoI Vs Sony India Pvt Ltd

On SLP, the SC confirmed the observation of the High Court that it is the duty and responsibility of the Assessing Officer/Assistant Commissioner to correctly determine the duty leviable in accordance with law before clearing the goods for Home consumption. The assessing officer instead, having failed in correctly determining the duty payable, has caused serious prejudice to the importer / petitioner at the first instance. Thereafter, in refusing to amend the Bill of Entry under Section 149 of the Act, to enable the importer / petitioner to claim refund of the excess duty paid, the Assessing Authority / Assistant Commissioner caused further great injustice to petitioner. The judgment whereby the High Court held that the order passed by the 2nd respondent cannot be sustained and is violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 265 and 300A of the Constitution of India and also the Customs Act, 1962, is therefore upheld.

- Revenue's SLP dismissed: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA