News Update

Cus - Export of non-basmati rice - Notification 20/2023 insofar as it denies the benefit of the transitional arrangement as contained in para-1.05 of the FTP 2023, is bad in law: HCCus - Refund of SAD - 102/2007-Cus - Areca Nut and Supari are one and the same - Objections with regard to name, nature and status of importer or buyers or the end use of goods purchased by them etc. are extraneous: HCCX - Interest on Refund - Since wrong order annexed by petitioner in paper book, Bench is unable to proceed further - Petition is dismissed with liberty to file a fresh one: HCGST - No E-way bill - When petitioner imports machinery and after Customs clearance, transports same to his own factory, it cannot be said that such a transportation would fall within the definition of term 'supply' - Penalty imposable under second limb of s.129(1)(a): HCGST - Fix responsibility on officers who allowed BG to lapse - Petitioner not justified in not renewing BG - Cost of Rs.15 lacs imposed, to be paid to PM Cares Fund: HCGST - Since the parties agree that petition can be disposed of on the basis of records available before Appellate Authority, petitioner is directed to enclose all documents filed before Appellate Authority in a compilation, in form of a paper book: HCWrong RoadST - Whether any service is used for personal consumption or not is certainly question of fact and being question of fact, no substantial question of law arises: HCGovt proposes to amend Geographical Indication of Goods Rules; Draft issued for feedbackST - If what has been paid as tax is without authority of law, Revenue should refund the same - Denial of credit would result in the whole exercise being tax neutral: HCWarehousing Authority notifies several agri goods to be stored in only registered warehousesST - Even if the petitioner may have a case on merits, it is best left to be decided by the Appellate Authority under the hierarchy prescribed under the FA, 1994: HCUS FDA okays Eli Lilly Alzheimer’s drugGST - Petitioner challenges jurisdiction of assessing officer - Petitioner is entitled to file an appeal u/s 107 by availing an alternate efficacious remedy: HCFive from Telangana killed in car accident on Pune-Solapur HighwayGST - Existence of an alternative remedy is a material consideration but not a bar to the exercise of jurisdiction: HCHush money case against Donald Trump - Sentencing deferred to Sept 18GST - It is open to a trader to take goods by whichever route he opts, unless the law otherwise requires, destination point being intact: HCDeadly hurricane Beryl smashes properties in JamaicaGST - Conclusion that taxable person is providing a service to supplier while taking the benefit of a discount by facilitating an increase in the volume of sales of such supplier is ex facie erroneous and contrary to the fundamental tenets of GST law: HCIsrael claims 900 militants killed in Rafah since May monthGST - Order expressly records that personal hearing notice was returned with endorsement 'no such person at address' - Since petitioner has shifted to a new premises, it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to contest demand: HC116 die in stampede at UP ’Satsang’I-T- Application for revision of order dismissed in limine on grounds of delay; case remanded for re-consideration: HCWe are deepening economic ties with India, says US officialI-T- As per Section 119(2)(b), power to condone applications relate to claims for amount exceeding Rs 50 lakhs are to be considered by CBDT; however it is impermissible for CBDT to pass order on merits: HC8 Dutch engineers build world’s longest bicycle - 180 feet, 11 inchesI-T- Additions framed u/s 68 for unexplained income & u/s 69 for unexplained expenditure not tenable where complete transactional details are furnished & not doubted: HCRailways earns Rs 14798 Crore from Freight loading in June monthI-T- Delay in filing ITR is per se insufficient reason to estimate assessee's profit @15% on turnover, more so where audited financial report is filed in timely manner: ITATMoD inks MoU to set up testing facilities in Unmanned Aerial System in TN Defence Industrial CorridorI-T- For invoking section 69A, assessee should be found to be owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article & which is not recorded in the books of account: ITATGovt proposes Guidelines for ethical approach to Coal MiningI-T- TDS credit can be allowed based on AIS, where details pertaining to TDS, advance tax & other payments are reflected in Form 26AS: ITATVaishnaw to inaugurate Global IndiaAI Summit 2024I-T- Lending money with the primary intention of earning interest can be considered a business activity, but nature and manner of lending, as well as the frequency, should be taken into account: ITAT
 
Sanitary Napkins Exempted - Who benefits?

JULY 25, 2018

By Vijay Kumar

Be careful what you wish for because you might get it

An old Chinese proverb goes, "Be careful what you wish for because you might get it". If one goes by the news reports and social media comments, it would appear that the greatest happening in that greatest post-Independence taxation happening is the exemption announced for sanitary napkins. Champions of the napkin movement were vociferous in their attack on the Modi Government on the unfair tax on sanitary napkins. There were a couple of writs in High Courts and one High Court is reported to have remarked, "why sanitary napkins are not exempt from the Goods and Services Tax, when items like bindis, sindoor and kajal were kept out of its ambit." The Union of India has filed a transfer petition in the Supreme Court and the Apex Court has stayed the proceedings in the High Courts.

Now that the GST Council has announced its decision to reduce the GST on napkins from 12% to NIL, all these cases cease to have even academic interest. The Council's recent decision has been hailed as one of the best ever decisions the mighty Council has ever taken. Finance Minister Piyush Goyal declared that mothers and sisters will be very happy to hear that sanitary pads are now 100 percent exempt from tax. Swati Maliwal of the Delhi Commission for Women tweeted, " Centre displayed extreme arrogance by not exempting sanitary napkins from GST over past 1 year! Glad that finally GST Council has made this happen. When Bindis & Sindoor can be exempt from tax, why not pads - lack of which cause terrible suffering to girls and women ". Even before GST was launched, she had written to the then Finance Minister, " Understandably, taxation of sanitary napkins which is a basic necessity, denies its access to many. It makes sanitary napkins unaffordable for millions of poor Indian women who end up using dangerous materials such as dirty cloth, straw and sand instead………..This one decision of the Union government shall positively impact and improve the health and hygiene of millions of women ."

Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parikkar tweeted, A welcome decision to exempt sanitary napkins from GST at the 28th #GSTCouncilMeet chaired by Shri @PiyushGoyal . An important step by @narendramodi Govt. that is vital to the health and well-being of women and girls .

Rajasthan Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje tweeted, The landmark decision to exempt #GST on #SanitaryNapkins is another welcome amendment and a long standing demand of women across #India. A reminder that the #ModiSarkaar stands with its people - a government of the people.

Union Minister Smriti Iranihad equal praise, Thankful to GST Council and Minister @PiyushGoyal for exempting Sanitary Napkins from GST; a welcome step towards encouraging menstrual hygiene among young girls and women.

If this was such a bad tax, why did it bloody exist for the last one year?

Mr. Arun Jaitley had explained in November 2017 that - If you reduce the 12% tax rate on sanitary napkins, we won't have an Indian manufacturer left; the Indian market would be flooded with cheaper Chinese products and as a result, the Indian manufacturing sector would suffer greatly. So, he was doing a favour to the Indian Industry by levying that 12% GST on sanitary napkins, which lofty aim somehow went above the heads of television anchors, women activists and some lawmakers.

The Government of India gave an official clarificatory explanation in a Press Note dated 10.07.2017 which stated:

GST rate for Sanitary Napkins

10-July-2017 18:48 IST

_________________________________________________

There are some remarks made by various column writers on GST rate on sanitary napkins. It may be mentioned that the tax incidence on this item before and after GST is the same or less.

Sanitary napkins are classifiable under heading 9619. In pre­GST, they attracted concessional excise duty of 6% and 5% VAT and, the pre­GST estimated total tax incidence on sanitary napkins was 13.68%. Therefore, 12% GST rate had been provided for sanitary napkin.

Major raw materials for manufacture of sanitary napkins and applicable GST rates on them are as under:

a) 18% GST rate

• Super Absorbent Polymer

• Poly Ethylene Film

• Glue

• LLDPE- Packing Cover

b) 12% GST rate

• Thermo Bonded Non­woven

• Release Paper

• Wood Pulp

As raw materials for manufacture of sanitary napkins attract GST of 18% or 12%, even with 12% GST on sanitary napkins, there is an inversion in the GST structure. Though, within the existing GST law such accumulated ITC will be refunded, it will have associated financial costs [interest burden] and administrative cost, putting them at a dis­advantage vis­à­vis imports, which will also attract 12% IGST on their imports, with no additional financial costs on account of fund blockage and associated administrative cost of refunds.

If the GST rate on sanitary napkins were to be reduced from 12% to 5%, it will further accentuate the tax inversion and result in even higher accumulated ITC, with correspondingly higher finical costs on account of fund blockage and associated administrative cost of refunds, putting domestic manufacturers at even greater dis­ advantage vis­à­vis imports.

Reducing the GST rate on sanitary napkins to Nil, will however, result in complete denial of ITC to domestic manufacturers of sanitary napkins and zero rating imports. This will make domestically manufactured sanitary napkins at a huge disadvantage vis­à­vis imports, which will be zero rated.

So, according to the Government's opinion in July 2017 and November 2017, a 5% GST on Sanitary Napkins would have been a disaster and a nil rate would have been a calamity. Come July 2018 and this is what the Government says, Didn't they realise in July 2017 and November 2017 that nil rate on sanitary napkins will improve health & hygiene and empower women?

Now, what is going to happen? Will the price of sanitary napkins go down? Not likely as per the explanation given by Arun Jaitley. But the present Finance Minister is reported to have said, " I have already instructed the department which looks after anti profiteering to investigate to ensure that either the rates would have come down on July 1,2017, or it should come down now. It cannot be that they have the cake and eat it too". Arun Jaitley is strangely silent now on this issue, though he is very active on twitter and Facebook. Who is right? Arun Jaitley or Piyush Goyal? Both can't be .

GST is a very simple tax and the stakeholders should be very careful about what they ask the Government. This kind of aberration had happened earlier in Central Excise, when certain goods like Naphtha and ready built houses were exempted. They had to pay 8% on the exempted goods and that was a disaster that made industrialists rush to the North Block begging the Government to impose some duty on the exempted goods. Now, perhaps, all the activists in favour of the, "No tax on bleeding" campaign will have to request the Government and GST Council to impose at least a nominal tax on sanitary napkins so that some of the input tax can be retrieved and the price levels maintained. It was certainly a messy affair.

Moral of the story, as the Chinese proverb says is, "Be careful for what you wish for because you might get it" and as of now, the Chinese may have the last laugh.

Demand of Rs. 1.32 Crores for not filling e-way bill correctly: A transport Company was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1,32,13,683/, by an Assistant Commissioner of SGST, which was confirmed by a Joint Commissioner, for not uploading/updating the part-B of the e-way bill which is a required condition to be fulfilled in accordance with Rule 138(5) of the M. P. Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The transporter approached the High Court in writ petition which was dismissed. They are now before the Supreme Court and the transporters are off the roads on strike. Don't take your e-way bill lightly lest you should get stuck on the road. Please see 2018-TIOL-2809-HC-MP-GST.


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

India's Path to Becoming a Superpower: An Interview with Pratap Singh



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.