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

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (8) TMI 735

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on, example, or list. Semicolons are used to join two independent clauses/ subclauses , or two complete thoughts that could stand alone as complete sentences. That means they're to be used when you're dealing with two complete thoughts that could stand alone as a sentence. Section 17(5)(b)(i) sub-clause ending with a colon and followed by a provisio which ends with a semi colon is to be read as independent sub-clause, independent of sub clause Section 17(5)(b)(iii) and its proviso [of subclause iii]. Thereby, the provisio to section 17(5)(b)(iii) is not connected to the sub-clause of Section 17(5)(b)(i) and cannot be read into it. ITC on GST paid on canteen facility is blocked credit under Section 17 (5)(b)(i) of CGST Act a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e is not authorized to use the canteen facility. In other words, employer-employee relationship is must to avail this facility. 3. Applicant has submitted that they are not in the business of providing canteen service and hence recovery of nominal amount will not fall in definition of supply at all. Similar view is also upheld by Maharashtra AAR in the case of Jotun India (P) Ltd- 2019-TIOL-312-AAR-GST. 4. The applicant submitted that they deducted nominal amount from employee s salary for availing canteen facility. In other words, difference between amount paid to service provider and amount recovered from employees is cost to company as salary cost. Question on which Advance Ruling sought 1. Whether input tax credit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... his activity carried out by applicant is without consideration. 8. We now detail our findings on admissibility of GST paid on canteen charges. Section 17(5)( b) of CGST Act, 2017 reads as follows:- Section 17(5)(b) (b) the following supply of goods or services or both- (i) food and beverages, outdoor catering, beauty treatment, health services, cosmetic and plastic surgery, leasing, renting or hiring of motor vehicles, vessels or aircraft referred to in clause (a) or clause (aa) except when used for the purposes specified therein, life insurance and health insurance: Provided that the input tax credit in respect of such goods or services or both shall be available where an inward supply of such goods or services .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... with a colon and followed by a provisio which ends with a semi colon is to be read as independent sub-clause, independent of sub clause Section 17(5)(b)(iii) and its proviso [of subclause iii]. Thereby, the provisio to section 17(5)(b)(iii) is not connected to the sub-clause of Section 17(5)(b)(i) and cannot be read into it. Judicial Discipline 8.4. i. We find our view is in compliance to judicial discipline as laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court and Hon ble High Courts. The relevant extract of Hon ble Supreme Court s judgment in the case of PIL of Shri Jayant Verma v. Union of India, dated 16-2-2018 related to the expressions separated by semicolon is as follows: Firstly, purely grammatically, a semicolon separates .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is relevant for both the clauses separated by semi colon or not. In this decision, the High Court is of the opinion that the clause (i) is followed by ; and the word or . Therefore, each of the sub-clauses is independent provision and condition of 90% participation would not be applicable to clause (i). 8.5 We notice that case law: CCE, Nagpur vs Ultratech Cements Ltd as reported in 2010 (260) ELT 369 (Bom) was cited by applicant wherein credit was held not admissible to manufacturer on part of cost borne by worker. The case law pertains to Service Tax era. We now are dealing with GST matter and are to pronounce Ruling within the confines of CGST Act. The cited case law therefore does not apply to the present matter. Also, the IT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates