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
 
Misadventure of a clandestinely amended circular

JULY 24, 2019

By Vijay Kumar

THE CBIC has issued a Circular No.109/28/2019-GST, dated 22.07.2019 on Issues related to GST on monthly subscription/contribution charged by a Residential Welfare Association from its members, which was prominently reported by every newspaper worth its GST and analysed by every expert in the tax field. Before I proceed to add my own contribution to the totality of confusion, I should point out the extremely outrageous way in which a glaring blunder in the Circular was corrected.

Please see Clarification No.1 of the Circular as originally issued.

Sl. No.

Issue

Clarification

1.

Are the maintenance charges paid by residents to the Resident Welfare Association (RWA) in a housing society exempt from GST and if yes, is there an upper limit on the amount of such charges for the exemption to be available?

Supply of service by RWA (unincorporated body or a non- profit entity registered under any law) to its own members by way of reimbursement of charges or share of contribution up to an amount of Rs. 7500 per month per member for providing services and goods for the common use of its members in a housing society or a residential complex are exempt from GST.

Prior to 25th January 2018, the exemption was available if the charges or share of contribution did not exceed Rs 5000/- per month per member. The limit was increased to Rs. 7500/- per month per member with effect from 25th January 2018. [Refer clause (c) of Sl. No. 77 to the notification No. 12/2018- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2019 ]

This was carried by hundreds of publications and widely circulated in the social media. Now, please see the highlighted portion. It mentions clause (c) of Sl. No. 77 to the notification No. 12/2018 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06. 2019. How can Notification No. 12/2018 be dated 28.06.2019? Assuming it can be, there was no Notification No. 12/2018 issued on 28.06.2019. There was of course a Notification No. 12/2018, but that was issued on 29.06.2018. Some Babu in the Board bungled badly. Several websites even gave links to this Notification No. 12/2018, which is in no way related to the issue in hand. Maybe the confusion was because this Notification No. 12/2018 also mentions the amount of Rs. 5000/-. Further, this Notification No. 12/2018 does not have any Sl. No.77, or a clause (c) to it.

Obviously, later somebody in the Board realised this blunder and corrected it, but more obviously they were not ready to admit the blunder and correct it openly, but chose a very surreptitious mode. They redrafted the Circular incorporating the correct Notification and uploaded it on their site without telling anybody. The revised Circular as available in the CBEC website has the relevant portion as:

[Refer clause (c) of Sl. No. 77 to the notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended vide notification No. 2/2018- Central Tax (Rate), dated 25.01.2018 ]

So, it is actually

clause (c) of Sl. No. 77 to the notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended vide notification No. 2/2018- Central Tax (Rate), dated 25.01.2018

as mentioned in the revised Circular and not

clause (c) of Sl. No. 77 to the notification No. 12/2018- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2019

as mentioned in the original circular.

The Board could have simply issued a corrigendum to correct this mistake, but they did not want to admit the mistake and sought to correct it clandestinely. They would gladly harshly punish an assessee who does this kind of tinkering with his records. Okay, they have corrected their mistake and let us live happily ever after. No, sadly, the story doesn't end there. Even the uploading of the correction was done clumsily. Now you can find both the Circulars in the Board's website.

1. The first Circular mentioning the wrong Notification No. 12/2018 - http://www.cbic.gov.in/resources//htdocs-cbec/gst/circular-cgst-109.pdf

2. The revised Circular mentioning the correct Notification No. 12/2017 - http://www.cbic.gov.in/resources//htdocs-cbec/gst/circular-cgst-109n.pdf

While the first Circular is uploaded in many portals including government sites and the website of the GST Council, the second Circular is uploaded only on CBIC website – the rest of the world is perhaps unaware of it and that is precisely what the powers be would like.

Are we supposed to see all the notifications and circulars on an hourly basis and then research to find out if the CBIC has carried out any secret corrections? If this is the way the GST is to be administered, we are in for deep trouble. If there is anything like responsibility, maybe we could ask as to who approved the first circular, who approved the correction and who authorized a revised circular to be uploaded secretly.

God Save Taxpayers (GST)

THOU SHALT NOT ERR

Taxpayers Can Err; Government Will Not Forgive, Court Will: An assessee filled and filed online the GST TRAN-1 Form on 27th December, 2017. It committed an inadvertent error in showing the available stock of goods as on 30th June, 2017 in column 7(d) of the Form instead of column 7(a) of the Form. As a result of this error, it has been unable to avail of the Central GST Credit. After the due date for filing of the TRAN-1 Form was crossed, the system got locked down at the portal and no tax payer was able to view/amend their TRAN-1 forms. The portal opened up on 15th March, 2018 for filing the TRAN-2 Returns. It was at that stage the assessee realised that it had committed an inadvertent error in the TRAN-1 Form. The system, however, did not permit it to revise the TRAN-1 Form.

On 23rd April, 2018, the assesee addressed a representation to Officer, Single Point of Contact (SPOC) Delhi, GST-ITO, admitting to having committed the abovementioned inadvertent error and seeking permission to rectify the mistake. The credit amount involved was Rs.20,34,807/-. It was pointed out that on account of inability to avail of the above credit amount, the assessee was not in a position to file the GSTR-3B returns. On the said representation, the GSTO stated that it will be forwarded to the GST Council for further action. However, nothing happened. The assessee addressed further letters on 19th September, 2018 to SPOC and 24th September, 2018 to the Commissioner, Delhi GST, but was not permitted to rectify the TRAN-1 Form already filed online. An e-mail was addressed to the GSTN Nodal Officer on 22nd October, 2018 explaining the difficulty. After several reminders bore no results, the assessee approached the Delhi High Court in writ petition.

The High Court noted that there were earlier cases where the High Courts permitted rectification of the error observing, "The GST System is still in a 'trial and error phase' as far as its implementation is concerned".

The Court also noted with concern that the representations repeatedly made by the Petitioner were not attended to by the Revenue which resulted in the Petitioner having to approach the Court for relief.

The apprehension of the Revenue was that allowing rectification can open the 'flood gates', but the High Court observed that it can easily be allayed by the Revenue themselves if they provide a robust Grievance Redressal Mechanism that can address such genuine grievances of the traders instead of compelling every trader to approach the Court for relief.

So, the Court directed the Revenue to either open the online portal so as to enable the Petitioner to again file the rectified TRAN-I Form electronically or accept the manually filed TRAN-I Form with the correction on or before 31st July, 2019. The Petitioner will correspondingly be permitted to thereafter file the return in TRAN-2. The penalty and interest for the late filing of GSTR-3B will be waived off in view of the above directions, subject, of course, to the Petitioner being permitted to and in fact filing the rectified TRAN-1 Form as directed. (2019-TIOL-1564-HC-DEL-GST)

Dispute Resolution is an avowed goal of the department, but to resolve a dispute, there has to be a dispute in the first place. So, the government sows the seeds of dispute and watches merrily as it grows and clogs the justice system, especially the High Courts and finally would come out with a Sabka Vishwas Scheme. Do you need a High Court to tell you that if I make a mistake, I should have a reasonable opportunity to correct it? After all, the government is doing it all the time. If I make a mistake, I will be punished; if the Government makes a mistake, I will be punished. Fair enough?

LITIGATION PENDENCY HAS COME DOWN

A Member asked a question in the Rajya Sabha:

Will the Minister of FINANCE be pleased to state :-

(a)  whether Government is aware that there has been a significant rise in tax litigation cases in the recent past mainly on account of Government persisting with litigation despite high rates of failure at every stage of the appellate process;

(b)  whether Government would make effective framework in the income-tax law in this regard which would help in preventing and resolving tax issues; and

(c)  if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor?

The Minister of State answered yesterday

(a): There is no significant rise in indirect and direct tax litigation in the recent past on account of Government persisting with litigation.

In respect of Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC), the total pendency of appeals at Supreme Court, High Court and CESTAT as on 30.06.2017 was 2,73,591 whereas the same has significantly come down to 1,05,756 as on 31.03.2019, which is to the tune of 61% reduction. Details of the same are as under:

Forum

Appeals Pending as on 30.06.2017

Appeals Pending as on 31.03.2019

Supreme Court

5812

3109

High Court

27,570

15,626

CESTAT

1,49,554

63,615

Commissioner(Appeals)

90,655

23,406

Total

2,73,591

1,05,756

GST APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

A Lok Sabha Member asked the Finance Minister:

Will the Minister of FINANCE be pleased to state:-

(a)  Whether the Government has taken steps to resolve the disputes related to Goods and Services Tax (GST) and if so, the details thereof;

(b)  whether the Government has taken a decision to form appellate tribunal in the States in this regard;

The Finance Minister replied,

(a)  Section 109 of the CGST Act, 2017 empowers the Central Government to constitute, on the recommendation of Council, by notification, with effect from such date as may be specified therein, an Appellate Tribunal known as the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) for hearing appeals against the orders passed by the Appellate Authority or the Revisional Authority.

Accordingly, a notification to constitute the National Bench of GSTAT at New Delhi has been issued in this regard.

(b)  The sub section 6 of section 109 of the CGST Act, 2017 provides that the Government shall, by notification, specify for each state or Union Territory, a bench of the Appellate Tribunal for exercising the powers of the Appellate Tribunal within the concerned State or Union Territory on receipt of the request from any State and on the recommendations of the Council. The GST Council in its 35th meeting has agreed to recommend for the creation of the State Benches and Area Benches of the GSTAT in 24 States and 07 Union Territories.

CHANDRAYAAN IS OKAY, TRY GST RETURN:

A Cartoon doing the rounds in social media depicts a tax consultant congratulating the scientist for uploading Chandrayaan-2 successfully, but asks him, "try uploading a GST return"

Until Next Week


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.