|
Advanced Search Options
GST - Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 107 Records
-
2019 (1) TMI 1609
Scope of the contract / Bid - Applicable rate of tax post GST - Validity of Government order - payment of the outstanding due payable to the petitioner - difference in tax rate due to introduction of GST regime - HELD THAT:- The petitioner had entered into a contract with the respondents Board before the GST regime came into force. Therefore, a specific clause has been inducted in the bid document under clause 48.1. In the said circumstances, the GO impugned in this writ petition has been issued taking into consideration of the implementation of GST and directing the procuring entities to enter into supplemental agreements after negotiating with the existing works contractors, which in the considered opinion of this court would no way cause any prejudice to the petitioner.
As the interests of the contractors are fully protected under the impugned GO and supplemental agreements will be entered into only after a negotiation with the existing contractors and as such no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner.
Power to issue such GO - HELD THAT:- The tender notification issued by the 2nd respondent is governed by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and Section 21 of the said Act empowers the authority to issue any Government Order for the purpose of removing any difficulties in the implementing the Act and in view of the introduction of GST, in order to remove the difficulties, the impugned GO came to be issued and hence, it cannot be contended that the 1st respondent had no jurisdiction to issue such a GO.
Violation of principles of Natural Justice - HELD THAT:- The impugned order has been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice is also cannot be countenanced for the simple reason that, it is only a general GO issued in respect of the existing contractors who have entered into agreements prior to the implementation of GST. As already held, the impugned Go has been issued only to remove the difficulties in implementing the GST regime.
Petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1608
Denial of grant of refund of unutilized tax credit in respect of tax paid on input services - it was held that there shall be ad-interim relief as prayed for in para 17(D) meaning thereby the impugned demand notice dated 21.6.2018 and its operation and implementation is stayed hereby - HELD THAT:- Issue Notice returnable on 13th February, 2019.
By way of ad-interim relief, the respondents are restrained from making any coercive recovery pursuant to the impugned notification.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1592
Vires of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - time limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- The issue decided in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT] where it was held that the petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017 - petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1590
Vires of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - time limitation - Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- The issue decided in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT] where it was held that the petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017 - petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1589
Constitutionality of section 174 of KGST Act and 101st Constitutional Amendment - Jurisdiction - power to enact section 174 of KGST Act - amendment to Entry 54 of List II - time limitation - HELD THAT:- The issue decided in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT] where it was held that The petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017.
Petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1586
Constitutional validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - time limitation - HELD THAT:- Issue decided in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT] where it was held that The petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017 - petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1582
Filing of TRAN-1 - transitional credit - transition to GST regime - HELD THAT:- The Court is of the opinion that the authorities should take all expedious steps to ensure that the certificate is issued by the Bombay Commissionerate to enable further steps to be taken by the Commissionerate of Delhi, Karnataka and Gujarat. Since the first step towards distribution of the input credit claim is the certificate to be issued by the Bombay Commissionerate, the respondent shall pass appropriate orders ensuring that the Bombay High Court’s orders are respected and complied with utmost expedience.
List on 27th March, 2019.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1579
Vires of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - time limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- The issue is squarely covered by the decision in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT] where The petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017 - petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1565
Constitutional validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - demand barred by limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- The issue is settled in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT] where it was held that the petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017.
Petition dismissed applying the ratio of the case referred.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1563
Bail application - grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail - wrongful availment of input tax credit - offence under Section 132(1)(b) and (c) of CGST Act - HELD THAT:- The petitioner shall not be arrested, provided he appears before the Directorate General of GST Intelligence and in the event of his arrest, he shall be released on bail on furnishing security to the satisfaction of the competent authority.
Issue Notice.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1561
Vires of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - time limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- Reliance placed in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT] where it was held that The petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017 - petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1556
Constitutional Validity of Section 174 of KSGST Act - time limitation u/s 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- The issue covered by the decision in the cas of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT], where it was held that The petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017.
Petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1554
Constitutional Validity of Section 174 of KSGST Act - time limitation u/s 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- The issue covered by the decision in the cas of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT], where it was held that The petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017.
Petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1550
Constitutional validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - demand is barred by limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - Held that:- The issue is covered by the decision in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT], where the petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017 - petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1549
Constitutional validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - demand is barred by limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act - Held that:- The issue is covered by the decision in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT], where the petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017 - petition dismissed.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1515
CENVAT Credit - Form-GST TRAN-1 - grievance of the technical glitches to GSTN - Held that:- Issue Notice to the newly added respondent Nos. 6 and 7 returnable on 30.1.2019.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1492
Input Tax Credit - inward supply - distinct persons - Place of Provision of Services - Can a person, registered in WB, claim ITC for CGST and SGST of other states? - adjustment of ITC of one state’s CGST for payment of another state’s CGST - adjustment of ITC of Tamil Nadu GST for payment of IGST, whereas he is not registered in Tamil Nadu - Held that:- In this case, the location of the supplier, providing hotel, banquet hall or restaurant in Tamil Nadu and the location of the recipient i.e. the Applicant, receiving the service, is also Tamil Nadu. So, the Applicant can avail ITC on the said invoices in Tamil Nadu only, if registered in Tamil Nadu. In no case, the Applicant can claim/adjust/avail ITC outside Tamil Nadu on the said invoices, even if the invoices are issued as B2B mentioning the Applicant’s GSTIN in West Bengal - As input tax and its credit are always linked with whether the person is registered or not, the two components of GST paid on inward intra-state supply in Tamil Nadu could have been taken credit of, if only registration is taken in Tamil Nadu under Section 25(1) of the GST Act and is regarded as “distinct person” within the meaning of Section 25(4) of the GST Act.
As the Applicant is not registered under section 25(1) in Tamil Nadu, the SGST and CGST paid on intra-state inward supply in Tamil Nadu are not ‘input tax’ to the said person. The GST Act does not contain any concept of ‘input tax’ to an unregistered person. No credit of it is, therefore, admissible under the GST Act.
Ruling:- The Applicant is not registered under Section 25(1) of the CGST Act in Tamil Nadu. The SGST and CGST paid on intra-state inward supply in Tamil Nadu are not, therefore, ‘input tax’ to the Applicant. The GST Act does not contain any concept of ‘input tax’ in relation to an unregistered person. No credit of it is, therefore, admissible under the GST Act.
A person, registered in WB, cannot claim ITC for CGST & SGST of other states.
He cannot adjust the ITC of one state’s CGST for payment of another state’s CGST.
He cannot adjust the ITC of Tamil Nadu GST for payment of IGST, whereas he is not registered in Tamil Nadu.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1491
Exemption from GST - classification of services - Security Services and Scavenging Services to various hospitals under the State Government as well as the Central Government - N/N. 12/2017-CT(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and WB Govt Gazette Notification-1136-FT dated 28.06.2017, as amended - Bundling of services - Held that:- The services provided under the head “Scavenging Services”, according to the Applicant’s submission, includes manual cleaning, duties of attendant or operator of trolleys - Article 243G under Serial No 26 covers “Health and sanitation, including hospitals, primary health centres and dispensaries” - Article 243W under Serial No 7 covers “Public health sanitation, conservancy and solid waste management”.
No other entries in the Eleventh or the Twelfth Schedules of the Constitution appear relevant while examining applicability of the Applicant’s services bundled as ‘Scavenging Services’. ‘Health Care Service’ is defined under clause 2(zg) of the Exemption Notification. It means inter alia any service by way of diagnosis or treatment or care for illness, injury, deformity, abnormality or pregnancy in any recognized system of medicine in India and includes services by way of transportation of patient to and from a clinical establishment. It is classified under SAC 99931. It does not include any of the services the Applicant bundled under the description ‘Scavenging Services’ - Again, ‘Sanitation and similar services’ are classified under SAC 99945. It includes sweeping and cleaning, but only with reference cleaning of a road or street. Cleaning of hospital premises is not, therefore, classified under ‘Sanitation or similar service’.
The services the Applicant bundled under the description ‘Scavenging Services’ are, therefore, not exempt under Sl No. 3 of the Exemption Notification.
Ruling:- Benefit of exemption from the payment of GST is not available to the Applicant under Notification No 12/2017-CT(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and WB Govt Gazette Notification-1136FT dated 28.06.2017, as amended, for the supply of Security Services and the bundle of service that he describes as ‘Scavenging Services’.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1490
Exemption from GST - deployment of personnel like a plumber, sweeper, security guard, electrician, carpenter etc. (Sweeping service) to the West Bengal Housing Board - bundled services - Benefit of N/N. 12/2017-CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and WB Govt Gazette Notification-1136-FT dated 28.06.2017 - Held that:- From the Tender Notice of the Housing Directorate issued under their office memo no. 342/2E – 28 dated 13/03/2018 it appears that the Housing Directorate invites quotation for deployment of personnel at the RHEs under the Directorate for several services, including ‘Sweeping Service’. The job description of a sweeper mentioned therein includes sweeping of the compound and common staircase and corridors of all floors of the buildings in the Housing Estate, cutting of jungles and bushes, cleaning and disposal of garbage, cleaning of the roof, surface drain cleaning, pit cleaning of sewerage system etc. - It is, therefore, a bundle of activities that are classifiable under SAC 99853 as ‘cleaning service’. It may be eligible for the above exemption if it also qualifies as a service for public health sanitation, being an activity under Sl No. 7 (public health sanitation, conservancy and solid waste management) of the Twelfth Schedule to the Constitution.
'Sanitation and similar services’ are classified under SAC 99945. It includes sweeping and cleaning, but only with reference cleaning of a road or street. Sweeping of premises – public or residential – is not classified under ‘Sanitation or similar service’, Sweeping service that the Applicant supplies to the Housing Directorate cannot, therefore, be classified as an 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.
Ruling:- Sweeping Service that the Applicant supplies to the Housing Directorate of the Government of West Bengal, cannot be classified as an 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.
The exemption under Sl No. 3 or 3A, as the case may be, of Notification No 12/2017-CT (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and WB Govt Gazette Notification-1136-FT dated 28.06.2017 is not, therefore, applicable to such supplies.
-
2019 (1) TMI 1489
Classification of services - Packing of tea bags - rate of GST - composite supply - principal supply - whether the Applicant’s services to HUL are classifiable as packaging service or manufacturing service or both? - Held that:- Consuming tea contained in a tea bag does not require the tea leaves to be taken out of the bag. The tea bag itself is dipped in water, as the bag is porous and is filled with tea leaves. Tea bags, therefore, are distinct from tea leaves, offering a user friendly way of making the beverage. Tea bag pouch is, therefore, not a packaging material, but an input required for manufacturing tea bag as a commercial item separate from blended tea leaves. It is a new product having a distinct name, character and use, and classified as such under Tariff item 0902 40 40 - It is evident, therefore, that the Applicant’s service to HUL for manufacturing tea bags is service for manufacturing a product classified under Tariff item 0902 40 40, where physical inputs are owned by the recipient - The supply is, therefore, to be classified under SAC 9988 and taxed under Sl No. 26(f) of the Rate Notification.
The two services (service for manufacturing tea bags and the service for packaging of the manufactured tea bags) are supplied in terms of a single contract and at a single price (as may be ascertained from the invoices). The flow chart shows that the services are supplied as processes in a continuous assembly line, where packaging of tea bags in cartons and wrapping is ancillary to manufacturing tea bags. The tea bags, of course, cannot be delivered unless they are suitably packed. The Applicant is, therefore, making a composite supply to HUL where the service of manufacturing tea bags from the physical inputs owned by HUL is the principal supply.
Ruling:- The Applicant makes a composite supply to Hindustan Unilever Ltd, where the service of manufacturing tea bags from the physical inputs owned by the latter is the principal supply. It is classifiable under SAC 9988 and taxable at 5% rate under Sl No. 26(f) of Notification No. 11/2017–CT (Rate) dated 28/06/2017, as amended from time to time.
Applicability of this Ruling with respect to other recipients is subject to the specific nature of the contracts with them.
|
