|
Advanced Search Options
GST - Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 154 Records
-
2020 (7) TMI 353 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN
Exemption from GST - Lease Agreement between the Applicant Company i.e. the Lessee and RLDA for a period of 99 years - Amount transferred by the Applicant Company as Security Deposit in pursuance to the tender and lease agreement - amount deposited during February, 2019 - Applicability of N/N. 04/2019-Central Tax (rate) dated 29.03.2019 or Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (rate) dated 28.06.2017 - HELD THAT:- The elements regarding long term lease (present lease is 99 years) and entity having 20% or more of ownership of Central Government are satisfied (RLDA being the statutory body of Government of India) - but the two other conditions namely, industrial plots or plots for development of infrastructure for financial business and that to award such lease to developers in any financial business area needs examination. RLDA is not awarding industrial plots to applicant but a portion of land over which some residential infrastructures are meant to be built. An industrial plot is the one in which developer is granted permission by competent authority be it Central Government/ State Government in reference to some scheme of development. These plots are for a specific purpose and if plot-holders in future tries to engage in some other work or lease conditions of agreement are breached, then the developer has every right to eject that plot-holder.
In the present case, RLDA is just providing a parcel of land which is in its ownership therefore; the lease of the same cannot be categorized as meeting condition of industrial plot and for the purpose of financial business. RLDA has leased ordinary plots for residential purpose consequently the conditions of the said notification are not satisfied. Therefore, the said notification is not applicable in the instant case.
Thus, The Lease Agreement between the Applicant Company i.e. the Lessee and RLDA for a period of 99 years is not exempted from levy of GST in view of the Notification No. 04/2019-Central Tax (rate) dated 29.03.2019 or Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (rate) dated 28.06.2017 - the amount of ₹ 158657105/- which is transferred by the Applicant/SPV in pursuance to the tender and lease agreement dated 08.11.2019 is not exempted under GST in view of the Notification No. 04/2019-Central tax(rate) dated 29.03.2019 or Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 - amount of ₹ 158657105/- deposited during February, 2019 is not exempted from GST vide Notification No. 04/2019-Central Tax (rate) dated 29.03.2019 or Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (rate) dated 28.06.2017.
-
2020 (7) TMI 352 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, ANDHRA PRADESH
Classification of supply - composite supply or not - supply of mud engineering services along with supply of imported mud chemicals and additives provided on consumption basis by the Applicant under the Contract - classified under Entry 9986 (ii) - Service of exploration, mining or drilling of petroleum crude or natural gas or both? - eligibility for concessional GST rate of 5% against an Essentiality Certificate (‘EC’) under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs dated 30 June 2017.
HELD THAT:- The applicant is obligated to provide complete Mud Engineering and Drilling Waste Management Services. For provision of such services, it is essential to have all technical support (equipment/tools), technical personnel and required chemicals/additives. These components are clearly incidental and ancillary to main supply i.e. providing of mud engineering and drilling waste management Services for 3(three) HTHP Wells in KG Basin. If any one or more of these components is removed, the very nature of main supply i.e. provision of mud engineering and drilling waste management services would be affected. It also defeats the very purpose of the Contract and in such a scenario; there appears no service to be provided by the Applicant. Thus, the scope of the work to be provided by the Applicant under the Contract is a combination of supply of service and supply of goods which are naturally bundled in the ordinary course of business - wherein the principal supply is supply of service (mud engineering or drilling waste management services) and supply of goods viz. mud chemicals and mud additives which form incidental or ancillary supply to the principal supply.
t is observed that for “Mud Engineering and Drilling Waste Management Services”, the scope of work was detailed under Section-II of the Contract. The said scope of work consists of ‘deployment of personnel (mud coordinator, Mud Engineer etc,)- Ref: Clauses 11.1 to 11.3 ‘Technical support (clause-17), Laboratory Equipment (clause-15), Logistics (clause-16). It is observed that though the contract is for ‘Mud engineering and Drilling waste management services’, the scope of work or the consideration for such services is not based on quantum or volume of the service. The scope of work under the contract encompasses the events viz. supply of technical personnel, technical equipment (on rental basis) and supply of additives/chemicals/consumables. Consideration receivable by the applicant is with reference to provision of such each event (reference to Section-HI of the Contract). Thus, all these components are not supplied or provided as a package at a single price.
The supply of imported mud-chemicals and mud additives provided on consumption basis shall be classifiable as supply of goods under respective EISNs of goods as specified under CGST Act, 2017. Similarly, it is found that the other events supply of goods (on rental basis) and supply of services (supply of technical personnel) shall be accordingly classifiable independently under respective HSNs of Services/Goods as the case may be.
Thus, the supply of mud engineering services along with supply of imported mud chemicals and additives provided on consumption basis by the Applicant under the Contract do not qualify as composite supply - question related to classification not applicable - The benefits under referred Customs Notification is available to supply of such goods at the time of their importation subject to fulfilment of description, tariff item, lists and conditions specified therein and subject to the satisfaction of the Proper Officer.
-
2020 (7) TMI 351 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ANDHRA PRADESH
Determination of liability - classification to pay GST - reimbursement received by the Applicant under the Contract from the Customer towards Lost in Hole/Damage Beyond Repair of equipment/tool (in short equipment) during execution of the services mentioned in the Contract - HELD THAT:- By virtue of powers vested under Sub-Section (3) of Section-7 of the CGST Act, 2017, the Government, on recommendations of the Council, specify by a notification, the transactions that are to be treated as ‘supply of goods and not as a supply of services’ or ‘a supply of service and not as a supply of goods’. Further, under sub-section (2) of the Section-7 ibid {notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1)}, the activities or transactions specified in Schedule-III shall be treated neither as supply of services nor a supply of services. It is observed that the activities of the applicant (on which they sought advance ruling) under the subject contract did not figure in the list of activities or transactions as notified in Schedule-III. Therefore, the subject activity or transaction shall constitute a supply under sub-section (1) of Section-7 of the Act ibid in as much as the said activity or transactions is for a consideration and in the course of or furtherance of business - In case of damage of the equipment or tools, such reimbursement shall be repair cost (subject to maximum of the cost of equipment/tools to be reimbursed in case of the same were lost) and whereas in case of loss of equipment or tools, the amount to be reimbursed shall be the amount limited to original cost (F.O.B nearest port) reduced by depreciation at the rate of 10% per year to be proportioned for each completed month or part thereof subject to maximum depreciation of 50%.
The equipment/tools are tangible and movable. The amount of reimbursement of equipment/tools which are damaged beyond repair or loss is at an agreed depreciated value of the Original FoB Price of such equipment/tools. Going by the methodology and by nature of the equipment/tools, the activity of reimbursement towards Lost in hole/Damage Beyond repair of equipment /tools is rightly classifiable as ‘Supply of Goods’ in terms of Section-7 of the CGST Act, 2017. Depending upon the nature of actual goods involved in the subject activity, their classification is as per HSN notified for the goods and the Classification Rules made in this regard. Accordingly, the provisions relating to chargeability and levy of GST under the CGST Act and the Rules made there under as applicable to the supply of goods will apply.
Thus, the reimbursement received towards LIH equipment is to be considered as a supply as per Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 and hence, liable to GST - The reimbursement received towards LIH equipment is classifiable as ‘Supply of Goods’ in terms of Section-7 of the CGST Act, 2017. Depending upon the nature of actual goods involved in the subject activity, their classification is as per HSN notified for the goods and the Classification Rules made in this regard. Accordingly, the provisions relating to chargeability and levy of GST under the CGST Act and the Rules made there under as applicable to the supply of goods will apply.
-
2020 (7) TMI 350 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, ANDHRA PRADESH
Classification of services - Project Management Consultancy services provided to Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Engineering Department for Andhra Pradesh Rural Road Project (APRRP) for Road Construction - pure services or not - applicability of Sl. No. 3 - (Chapter 99) of Table mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.588 - (Andhra Pradesh) State Tax (Rate) Dated 12/12/2017 - HELD THAT:- The services rendered by the applicant include a wide range of services like, Review & verification of the Project DPRs, Project Management (execution) and Monitoring, Construction Supervision and Contract Management, including QAC and ensuring that the ESMPs are properly prepared and implemented.
Exemption under Sl.No.3 of Notification No 12/2017 dated 28.07.2017 as amended - HELD THAT:- Sl.No.3 of the notification describes pure services (excluding works contract service or other composite supplies involving supply of any goods) provided to the Central Government, State Government or Union territory or local authority or a Governmental authority by way of any 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 services provided by the Applicant are exempted under Sl.No.3 of Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.07.2017 as amended further by Notification No. 32/2017 - Central Tax (Rate), dated: 13.10.2017.
-
2020 (7) TMI 349 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, ANDHRA PRADESH
Exemption from GST - services provided under vocational training courses recognised by National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) - whether exempted either under Entry No.64 of exemptions list of Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 or under Educational Institution defined under Notification 12/Central Tax (Rate)? - HELD THAT:- The applicant falls under definition of education vide the Clause No. 2 (y) (iii) as ‘education as a part of approved vocational education training’ in GST Notification No.12/2017 of Central Tax Rate dated 25th June 2017.
The approved vocational education course is also defined in clause 2(h) of the above mentioned Notification No.12/2017 dated 28th June, 2017 and it is observed that the applicant was granted affiliation by the National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) in respect of vocational skills pertaining to Formal Trades viz., Diesel Mechanic, Computer Operator and Programming Assistance (COPA), Welder, Dress Making and Motor Mechanic. These vocational course are attracting NIL rate of tax under GST Act, 2017 (Entry 66 of Notification NO.12/2017 CT Rate dated 28th June 2017).
-
2020 (7) TMI 348 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, ANDHRA PRADESH
Levy of GST and Service tax - coaching provided by the applicant to its students - scope of the term ‘educational institution’ as defined under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dt.28.06.2017 - whether applicant is supplying the services to the students as an educational institution? - service of supply of food i.e. catering and accommodation to the students for these courses.
Whether the services of supply of service of education as per the curriculum prescribed by the statutory authorities/ government to the students of the applicant tor obtaining qualifications/ certificates of CA-Foundation, CA-Inter, CA-Final, CMA (ICWA)-Foundation, CMA-Inter, CMA-Final and Intermediate duly recognized by the respective statutory authorities/ government are exempted under Notification NO.12/2017-CT (Rate) dt.28.06.2017 (entry No.66(a)), as amended or Not?
HELD THAT:- In the instant case, the coaching or training service provided in respect of the courses pertaining to CA (Inter & Final) and ICWA (Inter & Final) does Not fall under clause (i) of the above said definition, as the same is Not related to pre-school education and education up to higher secondary school or equivalent. Similarly, the service provided by the applicant also does Not fall under clause (iii), as the same is Not related to imparting of education as a part of an approved vocational education course (which is generally a Non-academic course and a specific trade / vocation oriented course) - In the instant case, the coaching or training provided by the applicant is for preparing the students for wTiting/appearing CA(Inter & Final) and ICWA (Inter & Final) Exams conducted by ICAI/ ICWAI. The said coaching or training per se does Not lead to grant of a certificate or diploma or degree or qualification which is recognized by any law. It only aims at giving a better preparation to the students and improves their chances in the examination. It is similar to any other coaching or training given in respect of competitive / entrance examinations such as IIT, EAMCET etc.
It is pertinent to mention that the coaching or training as imparted by the applicant is neither mandatory Nor sine qua Non to the students appearing for CA / ICWA examination. Students, who prepare on their own, can also appear for these examinations and qualify basing on their performance. Hence, as stated supra, the coaching or training imparted by the applicant is only a facilitation / improvisation of the preparation for the said exams and canNot be considered as a coaching/training leading to grant of certificate, qualification etc. recognized by law - the coaching or training service provided by the applicant to the aspirants of CA-Foundation, CA-lnter, CA-Final, CMA (ICWA)-Foundation, CMA-Inter, CMA-Final and Intermediate is Not the service provided by means of ‘education as a part of curriculum that has been prescribed for obtaining a qualification prescribed by law’. Hence it cannot be said that the coaching / training given by the applicant to CA aspiring students (for appearing and qualifying in the examinations) would lead to grant of certificate/qualification recognized by law. Therefore, the service rendered by the applicant is Not a service by way of ‘education as a part of curriculum for obtaining a qualification recognized by any law for the time being in force’.
Supply of food and accommodation to the students of the applicant - Applicability of Entry No.66 of Notification No.i2/20i7-Central Tax (Rate) dt.28.06.2017 as amended by Notification No.2/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018 - HELD THAT:- The services of provision of food and accommodation to the students perusing the said courses are liable to GST under the same Notification and also as clarified vide CBIC Circular NO.85/04/2019-GST, dt.01.01.2019 that supply of food, beverages by an educational institution to its students, faculty and staff, where such supply is made by the educational institution itself, is exempt under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, vide SI. No. 66 w.e.f. oi-oj-2017 itself. As applicant Not qualified as an educational institute, the above exemptions won’t be applicable.
-
2020 (7) TMI 347 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, ANDHRA PRADESH
Nature of supply - sales goods after import - single supply or two independent supplies - - applicable rate of tax - import of drill bits for supply to ONGC at its location in India on consumption basis involves two supplies namely, Import into India of drill bits - Indigenous movement from the port of import to ONGC’s location - If two supplies are involved in the abovementioned transaction then whether two Essentiality Certificates (EC) are required to be issued for availing benefits with respect to concessional duties of IGST and CGST - HELD THAT:- It is a self-asserted and admitted fact on record that the Applicant, under a contractual obligation, is required to import drill bits by themselves as an importer and undertake to supply drill bits to the delivery location of ONGC on consignment basis i.e. sale on approval basis - the activity of import and subsequent supply of drill bits by the Applicant to ONGC does not qualify as one single supply.
In terms of Section 7(2) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the supply of goods imported into the territory of India, till they cross the customs frontiers of India, shall be treated to be a supply of goods in the course of inter-state trade or commerce. As per Section 2(4) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) Act, 2017, read with Section 2(11) of the Customs Act, 1962, “customs frontiers of India” means the limits of a customs area viz. the area of a customs station or a warehouse and includes any area in which imported goods or export goods are ordinarily kept before clearance by Customs Authorities - It is a settled legal proposition that once the goods imported are cleared by the Customs authorities, all the provisions of the Customs Law (relates to imported goods) ceases to be applicable or extendable to such goods. It is therefore, clear that the activity of import of drill bits by the Applicant is a distinct activity of supply of goods in the course of inter-state trade or commerce.
The post import activity of the Applicant is therefore, clearly falls within the scope of inclusive portion of expression “supply” under Section-7(a) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. Depending upon the nature of supply, such supply of drill bits done by the Applicant are taxable services and is leviable or chargeable to CGST or IGST under CGST Act, 2017 or IGST Act, 2017, as the case may be. Any exemption from the whole or part of the tax, either absolutely or subject to conditions as may be specified, is only through a Notification issued by the Government by virtue of power vested in Section 11 of the CGST Act, 2017 or Section-6 of the IGST Act, 2017, as the case may be.
It is evident that the exemption granted under Notification No. 3/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 is a conditional one. It is a settled law that the benefits or exemption of a Notification (a conditional in nature) is available or eligible to the goods, only if the conditions specified therein are fulfilled or complied with.
-
2020 (7) TMI 346 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, ANDHRA PRADESH
Export of services or not - Intermediary service or not - marketing and consultancy services supplied by the applicant - HELD THAT:- It is evident from prima fade understanding of the issue that supplier of service i.e., the applicant is located in India and the recipient of the services i.e., Grace Davison (Singapore) is located outside India. But the third parameter i.e., the place of supply of service being outside India is mil applicable in the instant case basing on the facts as submitted by the applicant. The applicant renders its marketing and consultancy services to its overseas client and carries out all the functions in India as necessitated by its client. The mere fact that the payment has been received in convertible foreign exchange by the applicant will not qualify the transaction of the applicant as export of services.
The applicant in the present case by providing marketing and consultancy services, facilitates the supply of goods i.e., fluid cracking catalysts and its additives from Grace Davison(Singapore) to it's clients in the Territory i.e, India. Besides, the condition that transaction not being done on his own account makes the applicant rightly fit into the definition of intermediary in the instant case - In the instant case the intermediary services are provided to the recipient located outside India and the Inter-state provisions as contained under Section 7 (5) (c) shall be applicable and hence IGST is payable under such transaction.
-
2020 (7) TMI 345 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, ANDHRA PRADESH
Classification of Supply - transfer (sale) of ongoing business / unit - supply of goods or supply of services or supply of goods services - Research & Development work in Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) & formulation molecules & manufacture of formulation products in small quantity for R & D purpose - SI.No.2 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 - transfer of unutilized credit - HELD THAT:- In the instant case the activity of the ‘transfer’ is made for a consideration, but neither in the course of the business nor for the furtherance of the business. A going concern is a onetime affair made where the business is sold including assets in entirety or an independent part thereof. Even though this transaction does not amount to a ‘supply’ as per definition, but qualified to be one under the scope of supply as it is backed by the term ‘includes’ in Section 7(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Thus, in the broadened interpretation of the term ‘includes’, this activity is brought under the scope of supply.
Whether ‘ongoing concern’ is to be treated as ‘supply of goods’ or ‘supply of services’? - HELD THAT:- The definition of services qualifies ‘anything other than goods’ as service. In this context it is obvious that the ‘going concern’, which was excluded form list of ‘supply of goods’ as discussed above, would automatically fall under ‘supply of services’ - Further, the description of services under SI.No.2 of Chapter 99 of Notification No. 12/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 provides for “Services by way of transfer of a going concern, as a whole or an independent part thereof’ as nil rated. Hence, the transaction is not liable to tax.
Whether the applicant can file GST ITC-02 return and transfer unutilised ITC from Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh unit to Bengaluru, Karnataka Unit? - HELD THAT:- In case of sale or transfer, the transferor can transfer unutilised input tax credit to the transferee, which is lying in his electronic credit ledger, by filing Form GST ITC-02.
The transaction would amount to supply of services - the transaction would cover SI.No.2 of the Notification No.12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 - the unutilised ITC from Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh unit to Bengaluru, Karnataka Unit can be transferred by filing GST ITC-02.
-
2020 (7) TMI 344 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, ANDHRA PRADESH
Classification of vessel - rate of IGST - Tug Jupiter, let out under a charter for 730 days (with an option to extend the contract one year more) - Whether classifiable under SAC 996602 or under SAC 997319? - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF CUS. (IMPORT) , MUMBAI [2013 (7) TMI 881 - CESTAT MUMBAI] categorically, held that they are not machinery, equipment or tools. In an appeal to High Court in the case, the court ratified the same and hence a tug is not a machinery, equipment or tools independently but considered to be a vessel.
Thus, Tug Jupiter let out by the applicant to RIL on charter basis is classifiable under Sl.No.10 of Heading 9966, vide Notification No. 1/2018-IT(Rate) dated 25.01.2018 read with Notification No. 8/2017-IT(Rate) dated 28.06.2017.
-
2020 (7) TMI 343 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Participation in the proceedings - permission to make copies of the seized documents - HELD THAT:- There is a provision in law as has been placed by Mr. Dugar that “the person from whose custody documents are seized under subsection (2) shall be entitled to make copies thereof.” - There is no ambiguity or illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. However, we direct the appellant/petitioner to take steps in terms of Section 67 subsection 5 under Chapter XIV of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, if he is so advised. If the appellant/petitioner takes steps as per said subsection 5 of Section 67 under Chapter XIV of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, then the respondent no. 3 is directed to allow the appellant/petitioner to make copies of the seized documents by 13th July, 2020 subject to compliance of statutory formalities.
The appellant /petitioner is directed to give written reply to the show cause notice by 20th July, 2020.
-
2020 (7) TMI 342 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Grant of Bail - Input Tax Credit - fake bills - allegation against the petitioner who is a Chartered Accountant is of making fake firms who later on claimed input tax credit - HELD THAT:- It is deemed proper to allow the bail application.
This bail application is, accordingly, allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of ₹ 1,00,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of ₹ 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
-
2020 (7) TMI 341 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Grant of Bail - offence under Section 132(1) 1 Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017, P.S. Commissionerate, District Meerut - HELD THAT:- Learned A.G.A. could not dispute the fact that the co-accused has already been released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond.
The applicants-Mohd. Shamshad and Sajjad are directed to be released on bail, under Section 132(1)1 Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, P.S.- Commissionerate, District- Meerut on their furnishing a personal bond only to the satisfaction of the jail authorities, where the applicants are languishing - Application disposed off.
-
2020 (7) TMI 340 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - restaurant services - allegation that benefit of reduction in GST rate not passed on by way of commensurate reduction in prices - contravention of section 171 of CGST Act - penalty - HELD THAT:- The profiteered amount is determined as ₹ 41,93,431/- as has been computed in Annexure-14 of DGAP's Report dated 27.12.2019 - Accordingly, the Respondent is directed to reduce his prices commensurately in terms of Rule 133(3)(a) of the above rules - Further, since the recipients of the benefit, as determined, are not identifiable, the respondent is directed to deposit an amount of ₹ 41, 93,431/- in two equal parts of ₹ 20,96,715.50 each in the Central Consumer Welfare Fund and the Maharashtra State Consumer Welfare Fund as per the provisions of Rule 133(3)(c) of the CGST Rules, 2017 alongwith interest payable @ 18% to be calculated from the respondent from his recipients till the date of its deposit. The above amount of ₹ 41, 93, 431/- shall be deposited, within a period of 3 months from the date of passing of this order failing which it shall be recovered by the concerned CGST/SGST Commissioners.
Penalty - HELD THAT:- The respondent has denied the benefit of tax reduction to the customers in contravention of the provisions of section 171(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and he has thus resorted to profiteering. Hence, he has committed an offence under section 171 (3A) of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore he is loable to penal action under the provisions of the section - accordingly, a notice be issued to him directing him to explain why the penalty prescribed under section 171 (3A) of the Act read with Rule 133 (3) (d) of CGST Rules, 2017 should not be imposed on him.
-
2020 (7) TMI 311 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, GOA
Maintainability of Advance Ruling application - scope of Advance Ruling - Levy of IGST or SGST & CGST - rate of gst - Fixing of Air conditioner & VRV system in Goa for a client (Recipient) registered outside Goa but not registered in Goa - Suppling of Air conditioner to client (Recipient) registered outside Goa but not registered in Goa consisting of Air conditioner (28%) Copper pipe, Drain pipe, Electric cable etc (18%) and fixing rate (18%) - Supplying of Air conditioner (28%) for residential house in Goa consisting of in case require additional item Copper pipe, Drain pipe, Electric cable etc (18%) and fixing rate (18%) - installation of Air conditioner (28%) can be done by sister concern or Third party to client based in Goa or Outside Goa @ (18%) GST for fixing - composite Dealer raise Service Bill for Fixing of Air Conditioner - stabilizer may or may not be sold with Air conditioner what is the Rate of GST Applicable on Stabilizer (18%) when it is Attached / Supplied with Air conditioner (28%) - Centralized Air Conditioning Systems. For (works contract) Rate of GST on Split Air Conditioning System fixed in room. And Rate of GST on movable Air conditioning System. Client Registered in Goa or Client registered outside Goa.
HELD THAT:- This authority is of the view that, issues raised by the applicant are not covered by section 97(2) of the GST Act on which Advance Ruling can be sought. Only one issue could be dealt by this authority for issuing Ruling and that is whether supply made by applicant from Goa on behalf of third person who is not in the taxable territory of Goa to a place in Goa is to be taxed as Interstate Supply or Intra State Supply - For classification of any supply as Interstate Supply or Intra State Supply, two ingredients are relied upon and these are location of the supplier and place of supply. In the instant case, as said by the applicant, location of the supplier is Goa, place of supply will be outside Goa as per section 10(1)(b) of the IGST Act since, goods are supplied on behalf of a registered person outside Goa to a place in Goa.
The nature of supply made by the applicant is to be treated as a supply of goods in the course of interstate trade or commerce and tax is to be charged accordingly.
-
2020 (7) TMI 310 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Maintainability of appeal - appealable order or not - Detention of goods alongwith vehicle - Section 129 (3) of the U.P. G.S.T. Act and C.G.S.T. Act, 2017/ Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The instant petition has been filed bye-passing the remedy of appeal under Section 112 of the Act on the ground that the appellate tribunal has not been constituted till date.
It has been pointed out by learned standing counsel that the Government, having regard to the difficulty faced by the assessees in filing appeal on account of non-constitution of the Tribunal and its Benches in various States and Union Territories, has issued Central Goods and Service Tax (Ninth Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2019 notified in the Gazette of India dated 3rd December, 2019 stipulating that in such a situation, the three months' period shall be considered to be the date on which the President or the State President, as the case may be, of the Appellate Tribunal after its constitution under Section 109, enters office - Learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly admits the above legal position and also the fact that the goods have already been released.
The instant petition is disposed of by providing that the petitioner can invoke the remedy of filing appeal before the Tribunal in terms of the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax (Ninth Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2019.
-
2020 (7) TMI 309 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - sale of Flat - allegation that the benefit of input tax credit not passed on - contravention of section 171 of CGST Act - penalty - HELD THAT:- the Respondent has passed on benefit of ₹ 28,22,65,749/- to the home buyers on account of ITC which has been duly confirmed by the DGAP. Therefore, the Respondent is directed to pass on the balance benefit of ITC of ₹ 1,04,77,604/-in case of 908 residential flat buyers including the Applicant No. 1, mentioned at Sr. 1 & 2 of Table-G. as per Annexure-15 of the DGAP’s Report dated 10.12.2019. The details of the profiteered amount and the buyers have been mentioned by the DGAP in the above Annexure. These buyers are identifiable as per the documents placed on record and therefore, the Respondent is directed to pass on an amount of ₹ 1,04,23,791/- and the amount of ₹ 53,813/- to the other flat buyers and the Applicant No. 1 respectively along with the interest @ 18% per annum from the dates from which the above amount was collected by him from them till the payment is made, within a period of 3 months from the date of passing of this order as per the details mentioned in Annexure-15 attached with the Report dated 10.12.2019 in terms of Rule 133 (3) (b) of the above Rules. The Respondent shall not adjust any excess ITC benefit which he has passed on as per Annexure-16 against the benefit which is due to the beneficiaries as per Annexure-15. In case the above amount is not refunded by the Respondent during the above period it shall be recovered by the concerned Commissioner CGST/CGST and paid to the eligible buyers.
This Authority under Rule 133 (3) (a) of the CGST Rules, 2017 orders that the Respondent shall reduce the prices to be realized from the buyers of the flats of the above Project commensurate with the benefit of ITC received by him, Since the present investigation is only up to 31.03.2019 any benefit of ITC which accrues subsequently shall also be passed on to the buyers by the Respondent Accordingly, the DGAP under 133 (4) of the CGST Rules, 2017 is directed to further investigate the amount of benefit which is required to be passed on by the Respondent w.e.f. 01.042019 till 30.06.2020 or till the date of issue of Completion Certificate whichever is earlier.
Penalty - HELD THAT:- The Respondent has denied benefit of ITC to the buyers of the flats being constructed by him in his above project in contravention of the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and he has thus resorted to profiteering. Hence, he has committed an offence under Section 171 (3A} of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore, he is apparently liable for imposition of penalty under the provisions of the above Section. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice be issued to him directing him to explain why the penalty prescribed under Section 171 (3A} of the above Act read with Rule 133 (3) (d) of the CGST Rules, 2017 should not be imposed on him.
-
2020 (7) TMI 304 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, GOA
Classification of goods - Hand Sanitizers - whether covered under HSN 30049087 or not - rate of GST - HELD THAT:- Hand Sanitizers manufactured by the applicant are of the category of Alcobased hand sanitizers and are classifiable under heading 3808 of HSN to which rate of GST applicable is 18%.
Exemption form GST - HELD THAT:- As far as exempting hand sanitizers as essential commodity since it is classified as such by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, this Authority is of the view that Exempted goods are covered by Notification no.2 /2017/- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28/06/2017. Merely classifying any goods as essential commodity will not be the criteria for exempting such Goods from GST.
-
2020 (7) TMI 288 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Permission to withdraw petition - Legality and validity of para 10 of the ‘Bringing the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering under Superintendence, Direction and Control of the National Anti-Profiteering Authority –Notification of detailed Guidelines by NAA’ dated 04th October, 2019 issued by the respondent No.2 as well as the validity of all consequential notices and proceedings initiated by the respondents - HELD THAT:- The present writ petition and application are dismissed as withdrawn.
-
2020 (7) TMI 287 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Inaction on the part of the respondents of not disbursing the refund amount was owing to the non-functioning of the GST Appellate Tribunal - HELD THAT:- It is apparent that the petitioner has succeeded in appeal vide order dated 23rd July, 2019. Though nearly a year has passed, yet no proceeding has been filed challenging the said order till date.
In the opinion of this Court, the petitioner cannot be asked to wait endlessly for the respondents to challenge the order dated 23rd July, 2019. Consequently, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to refund the amount as directed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 23rd July, 2019 within four weeks. During this period, it shall be open to the respondents to file appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. All rights and contentions of the parties including objection, if any, to the maintainability of such proceedings are left open.
|
