News Update

CPI gets Rs 11 Cr tax notice for using old PAN numberGST - Penalty demand of Rs.3731 crores - A person who would fall within the purview of sub-section (1-A) of s.122 should necessarily be a taxable person who retains the benefits of transactions: HCFATP hand-wrings over slow regulation of crypto by member-countriesGST - Threatening and pressurising petitioner who is merely an employee - Highly unconscionable and disproportionate on the part of the officer: HCGST - Same relief was claimed in earlier petition which was withdrawn unconditionally - Fresh petition seeking same relief is barred by the estoppel principle: HCIncome tax hands over Rs 1700 Cr tax demand to Congress PartyGST - Neither SCN nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, hence cannot be sustained: HCStage-2 of Vikram-1 orbital rocket successfully test-firedGST - Non-application of mind - If reply was unsatisfactory, details could have been sought - Record does not reflect that such exercise was done - Matter remitted: HCHouthis claim UK has not capability to intercept their hypersonic missilesGST - Merely because a taxpayer has not filed returns for some period does not mean that registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCIsraeli forces kill 200 Palestinians at Gaza medical complex & arrest over 1000GST - Petitioner's reply, although terse, is not taken into account while passing assessment orders - Petitioner put on terms, another opportunity provided: HCUnveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Training Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silverCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesCus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTAT
 
Banks, FIs and NBFCs – Rule 6 of CCR adapts

FEBRUARY 29, 2016

By Jigar Doshi & Sunny Kachalia, SKP Business Consulting LLP

BUDGET 2016 aimed at rationalising the tax provisions with key focus on amending ambiguous provisions, provide assesse-friendly approach, rationalise the rates of Excise and Customs duty to boost domestic manufacturing, focus of clearing matters pending with Tribunals, etc. As regards Banks,FIs and NBFCs changes are proposed in Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR) to redefine admissibility of credits.

An important change under CCR is with regard to Rule 6 which is revamped and replaced with new set of Rules, which would determine admissibility of credits in case the manufacturer/service provider is manufacturing exempt goods/providing exempt services. With regard to the business of Banks, FIs and NBFCs, it would be pertinent to refer Rule 6(3B) of CCR which deals with admissibility of credit for services provided by way of extending loans, deposits or advances.

The provisions which stand as of now is reproduced as below:

Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (1), (2) and (3), a banking company and a financial institution including a non-banking financial company, engaged in providing services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances, shall pay for every month an amount equal to fifty per cent. of the CENVAT credit availed on inputs and input services in that month.

From the above it would be important to note that provisions dealing with claiming proportionate credit, reversing credit at 7% is not applicable (due to notwithstanding clause) to Banks, FIs and NBFCs and Banks, FIs and NBFCs are required to reverse 50% of their credit. Though there are ambiguities whether the said provision will apply only towards income earned out of services provided of extending deposits, etc or for the entire businesses (income streams) of the Banks, FIs and NBFCs.

Proposed Rule 6(3B) is reproduced as below:

A banking company and a financial institution including a non-banking financial company, engaged in providing services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances, in addition to options given in sub-rules (1), (2) and (3), shall have the option to pay for every month an amount equal to fifty per cent. of the CENVAT credit availed on inputs and input services in that month.

(Effective from 1 st April 2016)

The said change would now require Banks, FIs and NBFCs to ascertain the admissibility of creditsin light of Rule 6(1), (2) and (3) of CCR or reverse 50% of the credit as per revised Rule 6 (3B). Rule 6(1), (2) and (3) of CCR are completely revamped to rationalise admissibility of credits for taxable services and have also defined the sequence for reversal of credits. The said change would give an opportunity to optimise credits for Banks, FIs and NBFCs.

Further, it would be important to note that Rule 6(3B) (present and proposed) is applicable only to Banks, FIs and NBFCs providing services by way of extending loans, deposits and advances.

Considering the amendments, it is imperative that Banks, FIs and NBFCs evaluates the entire Cenvat credit considering the net credit which can be claimed. Separately, they must also analyse the income streams to ascertain which can fall within the purview of services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances; or which can be regarded as exempt/non-taxable under Service Tax. Separately, Asset Reconstruction Companies (ARCs) which are engaged in procuring Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) and servicing them as per the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002 need to ascertain how the change would impact their credits considering the overall income, i.e. income which can be regarded as taxable/exempt.

(DISCLAIMER : The views expressed are strictly of the author and Taxindiaonline.com doesn't necessarily subscribe to the same. Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. is not responsible or liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any interpretation, error, omission in the articles being hosted on the sites)

 


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Explanation 3 How to be interpreted for banks etc

The move to do away with restricting the credit to 50 per cent notwithstanding any other rule, and replacing it as an additional option to banks etc, is indeed welcome. However, as The new Explanation 3 to sub rule 1 of Rule 6 deems any activity which is not even as service as exempted service, would it not create an illogical scenario for banks and lenders where Loans and deposits received or given, being transactions in money, also get covered under exempted service. If that becomes the case, wouldnt banks lose more than 50 per cent of the credit they were enjoying till date. Clarity on the inclusion of Explanation 3 from CBEC would be required as to how it is to be interpreted.


Posted by Unnikrishnan Mohan
 

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023