Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Discussions Forum
Home Forum Goods and Services Tax - GST This
A Public Forum.
Anyone can participate to share knowledge.
We acknowledge the contributions of Experts/ Authors.

Submit new Issue / Query

AMORTISATION REQUIREMENT UNDER GST, Goods and Services Tax - GST

Issue Id: - 113876
Dated: 18-6-2018
By:- CABIJENDERKUMAR BANSAL

AMORTISATION REQUIREMENT UNDER GST


  • Contents

X(USA) has signed contract with Y(India) for production of goods & export to X.Mould was to be provided by X as per contract. X has given advance of ₹ 50 L to Y for purchase of mould in India & to be retained by Y for production. Y purchased mould from Z(India) & availed GST input on this. Should Y raise export invoice of mould to X(though physically to be retained by Y)? or Y shall add amortised cost of mould in export invoices of goods to X? is input eligible on purchase of mould by Y from z.

Posts / Replies

Showing Replies 1 to 5 of 5 Records

Page: 1


1 Dated: 18-6-2018
By:- Rajagopalan Ranganathan

Sir ,

It depends on the invoice raised by Z whether the invoice is raise in the name of Y or in the name of X but to be delivered to Y. If supply of mould by Z is to Y then Y can avail the credit and on exporting the mould to X on completion of production and supply programme he can claim the refund of ITC of gst paid on the mould. Under GST law amortization of mould cost is not comtyemplated.


2 Dated: 18-6-2018
By:- YAGAY and SUN

Pl. check point no. 1 of th Circular No. 47/21/2018-GST dtd. 08th June in matter.


3 Dated: 27-7-2018
By:- JAYARAMAN RAMAMURTHY

Sir,

in the said notification, i could not make any difference between 1.2 & 1.3.

can anyone explain to me with nice examples? thanks & regards

J Ramamurthy


4 Dated: 17-11-2018
By:- Ramaswamy S

The most confusing circular is the circular dated 8th June 2018 regarding moulds and dies. It has raised more doubts rather than clarity.


5 Dated: 17-11-2018
By:- Ramaswamy S

1.1 - situation where the tools are moved from the OEM to the component manufacturer. Not a supply. No tax payable. No reversal of credit.

1.2 Further clarifies point 1.1 that in such case no need to add the amortised value to the component.

1.3 situation (bill to ship to) - retained by the component manufacturer - no movement of tool from OEM to component manufacturer - Credit to be reversed. Amortised cost to be included in the value.

Had the clarification at point 1.2 be after 1.3, then the issue would have been clear. But that was not the intention.

Regards

S.Ramaswamy


Page: 1

Old Query - New Comments are closed.

Quick Updates:Latest Updates