The Gujarat High Court has observed that, the order of attachment of bank account is prima facie without the authority of law and the order of blocking of credit is not backed by any statutory provision.
The petitioner sought a direction to the respondent authorities to forthwith withdraw bank attachment. Since the order of attachment of the bank account as well as godown/office and blocking of credit were not placed on record and were not made available to the petitioner.
The division bench comprising of Justice Harsha Devani and Justice Sangeeta K. Vishen said that, Section 83 of the CGST Act provides for provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases and lays down that where during the pendency of any proceedings under section 62 or section 63 or section 64 or section 67 or section 73 or section 74, the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue, it is necessary so to do, he may, by order in writing attach provisionally any property, including bank account belonging to the taxable person in such manner as may be prescribed. Thus, section 83 of the CGST Act empowers provisional attachment of property, subject to the pendency of the proceedings under sections 62, 63, 64, 67, 73 or 74 of the CGST Act. The same does not contemplate, and rightfully so, provisional attachment pending any proceeding under section 83 of the CGST Act, inasmuch as, there can never be any proceeding pending under section 83 of the CGST Act as the same only empowers the State authorities to provisionally attach the property of a taxable person, subject to the provisions of section 83 being satisfied.
While allowing the petition, the Court also observed that, “the exercise of powers under section 83 of the CGST Act, whereby the bank account of the petitioner has been attached is totally without any authority of law. The order of attachment of bank account is prima facie without the authority of law and the order of blocking of credit is not backed by any statutory provision, the respondents are directed to forthwith withdraw the attachment of the bank account of the petitioner with the IDBI Bank”.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Haryana State Assembly has passed Haryana Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2019 which provides alternative Composition Scheme.
The Amendment enables alternative composition scheme for the supplier of services or mixed suppliers having an annual turnover up to Rs. 50 lakh in the preceding Financial Year.
The Amendment also provides for higher threshold exemption limit from Rs. 20 lakh to such amount not exceeding Rs. 40 lakh in case of the supplier who was engaged exclusively in the supply of goods, to provide for mandatory Aadhaar submission or authentication for persons who intend to take or have taken registration under the Act.
The Bill also provide that, the suppler would mandatorily offer facility for digital payment to recipient and for furnishing of Annual Returns and for quarterly payment of tax by taxpayer who opts for composition levy and to provide for certain other categories of taxpayers, an option for quarterly and monthly payments under the proposed new return filing system.
The Bajaj Electricals Limited has invited application from qualified CA, CMA and CS candidates for the post of Deputy / Assistant Manager – Taxation.
The Bajaj Electricals Limited (BEL), an 80-year-old trusted company with a turnover of Rs. 4716 Crores, is a part of the ‘Bajaj Group’.
Job Purpose & Scope
Knowledge of Tax laws (like GST, VAT/CST, Income tax, etc)
Knowledge of Indian corporate law
Understanding of statutory compliances
International Taxation will be an added advantage
Major Areas of Responsibilities & Authorities
Indirect tax
Direct tax
Qualification
PG – CS, CA – Any Specialization, ICWA (CMA)
For Further Information Click here.
The Supreme Court in the case of Superintending Engineering v Excise and Taxation Officer held that the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act are applicable on High Court while exercising revisional power since there is no express exclusion of the Limitation Act by the provisions of HP VAT.
The issue involved in the present appeal was whether the High Court while exercising revisional power, condone the delay beyond 90 days from the date of communication of the order while excluding the applicability of Section 29 of the Limitation Act and in consequence of Section 5 (dealing with power to condone delay in filing) of the Limitation Act.
The High Court refused to condone the delay against the order passed by the HP Tax Tribunal and held that the provision of Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be applied and the High Court cannot condone the delay. The revision has to be filed within 90 days, as provided in Section 48 of the Act of 2005.
The Bench constituting of Justices Arun Mishra, M.R. Shah and B.R. Gavai held that the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act are applicable to the revisional provision under Section 48 of the Act of 2005.
The Court stated that as the revision under the Act of 2005 lies to the High Court, the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act are applicable on the major reason that there is no express exclusion of the provisions of Section 5 and per se Section 29(2), unless a special law expressly excludes the provision, sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act are applicable. The Court discussed that scheme of the HP VAT, 2005 to conclude that the same does not attract the application of the Limitation Act. However, also, the intent of the scheme of the HP VAT is not to exclude the application of the Limitation Act.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi approved the signing of the Protocol amending the Convention between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the Federative Republic of Brazil for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income.
Implementation Strategy and Targets:
After Cabinet approval, necessary formalities for bringing the Protocol into force will be completed. Implementation would be watched and reported by the Ministry.
Major impact:
Through updation of the Double Taxation Avoidance Convention’s (DTAC’s) provisions to international standards, the Amending Protocol between India and the Federative Republic of Brazil will facilitate the elimination of double taxation. Clear allocation of taxing rights between the Contracting States through DTAC will provide tax certainty to investors & businesses of both countries. The Amending Protocol will augment the flow of investment through lowering of tax rates in source State on interest, royalties and fees for technical services. The Amending Protocol implements minimum standards and other recommendations of G-20 OECD Base Erosion Profit Shifting (BEPS) Project. Inclusion of Preamble Text, a Principal Purpose Test, a general anti-abuse provision in the DTAC along with a Simplified Limitation of Benefits Clause as per BEPS Project will result in curbing of tax planning strategies which exploit gaps and mismatches in tax rules.
Point-wise details:
a. The existing DTAC between India and Brazil was signed on 26th April, 1988 and was amended through a Protocol signed on 15th October 2013 in respect of exchange of information. Through the present Protocol, the DTAC has been amended on various other aspects.
b. The amended DTAC also implements the minimum standards as well as other recommendations of the G-20 OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Project.
Background:
The existing Double Taxation Avoidance Convention (DTAC) between India and Brazil being very old was required to be amended to bring it in line with international developments and also to implement the recommendations contained in the G20 OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project (BEPS).
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India ( ICAI ) has issued Clarification of Announcement hosted on 21.09.2019 related to Effective Date of Validity of Peer Review Certificate.
This is in continuation of earlier Announcement dated 21.09.2019 on the validity of Peer Review Certificate.
The Peer Review Board at its 59th meeting held on 23.08.2019, while considering the difficulties faced by practice units on the validity of Peer Review Certificate, decided as follows:-
The Peer Review Certificate will henceforth be effective from the date of submission of final clean report irrespective of the date of Peer Review Board meeting in which it is approved.
Provided that if the Final Clean Report has been submitted before the expiry of the earlier Peer Review Certificate, the effective date of the Certificate shall be the date next to the date at which earlier certificate is being expired.
For example:
(a) For 1st-time peer review: in case final clean report is received by the Board on 20.08.2019, and approved in the Board meeting on 30.09.2019, the said Practice unit cannot sign reports prior to 20.08.2019 of Listed Company. The effective date of the new certificate will be 20.08.2019.
(b) For the next cycle of Peer Review:
Further, it is clarified that temporary relaxation is being given to such Practicing Units to sign listed company reports as required by SEBI/other authorities till 30.09.2019, whose final clean reports have been received by the Board**.
It is further made clear that the Practicing Units shall not be eligible to sign listed company reports as required by SEBI/other authorities during the intervening period if the validity of their certificate has expired before the submission of the final clean report.
**[This relates to Practice Units whose Final Clean Report has already been received by the Board and pertaining to the Block period under review 2014-17 and later (as per Statement on Peer Review)]
Final Clean reports with reference to the above decision shall be :
The Practicing Units are advised to undertake the Peer Review well in advance before the time of the expiry of the Peer Review Certificate to avoid any hardship.
The Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) in Karnataka has ruled that, the activity of collecting exam fee (charged by any university Or institution) from students and remitting the same to that particular university or institution without any value addition to it is a service as a pure agent and hence the value is excluded from the taxable value of the applicant as per Rule 33 of the Central GST Rules / Karnataka GST Rules, hence exempted from Goods and Services Tax ( GST ).
The Applicant provides coaching, learning and training services in relation to under-graduate, graduate and post-graduate degree, diploma and professional courses on a standalone bases to students or for any institution, corporate, company, institutes, universities and colleges in the subject and branches of all types of disciplines such as commerce, hardware, software, computer, science, arts, business management, engineering, medical, industrial, pharmacy, mining, military, dance, acting, sports, journalism and any other ‘field of education and set up of coaching and training classes/ centers in relation to the same.
The AAR observed that, “The applicant is collecting the exact amount payable to institute or college or universities as exam fee from the students (service recipient) and remits the same amount to the respective institute or college or universities (third party) without any profit element or additions, on the authorization of the student. This payment is separately indicated in the invoice issued to the respective students. The applicant providing this kind of services to the student in ‘addition to the services as training and coaching institute. Hence the applicant satisfies all the conditions of the pure agent as narrated in Rule 33 of the COST Rules, 2017. Therefore, amount of the fee collected by the applicant from the student as exam fee which is remitted to the respective institute or college or universities is excluded from the value of supply”.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs ( CBIC ) has clarified that, Generation and quoting of Document Identification Number ( DIN ) on any communication issued by the officers of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) to taxpayers and other concerned persons are mandatory.
The CBIC has said that, the DIN would be used for search authorization, summons, arrest memo, inspection notices and letters issued in the course of any enquiry. This measure would create a digital directory for maintaining a proper audit trail of such communication.
The CBIC also directed that, no search authorization, summons, arrest memo, inspection notices and letters issued in the course of any enquiry shall be issued by any officer under the Board to a taxpayer or any other person, on or after the 8th day of November, 2019 without a computer-generated Document Identification Number (DIN) being duly quoted prominently in the body of such communication.
The Board also directs that any specified communication which does not bear the electronically generated DIN and is not covered by the exceptions shall be treated as invalid and shall be deemed to have never been issued.
The Board also issued steps to be followed for enabling DIN utility and electronically generate DINs.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Allahabad High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption v. Reham Foundation held that the power and jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal under Section 254(1) of the Act, 1961 is unfettered thereby enabling the Appellate Tribunal to direct registration of the Trust at its level itself but the same is not open as a matter of course and such power is to be exercised only in certain circumstances
The Appeal was preferred by the revenue against the order of the ITAT directing registration of the Trust under Section 12AA(1)(b) of the Act within a period of 60 days, failing which the Trust shall be deemed to have been registered.
The DR submits that the power for registration of a Trust or an institution under Section 12AA of the Act has been given to the Commissioner and cannot be exercised by the Tribunal. If at all on the scrutiny of the case in Appeal, a case is made out for registration of Trust, the matter is to be remanded to the Commissioner.
The Bench constituting of Justices MN Bhandari, S Chandra and M Mathur held that in the case where the Commissioner has refused to accept the application for registration of Trust after making a record that the activities and objectives of the Trust are not genuine and the Appellate Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal on the basis of the same material on record comes to the conclusion that the order of the Commissioner is perverse since it has been passed ignoring, misconstruing or misinterpreting such evidence, then it can direct registration of the Trust without remanding the matter to the Commissioner.
While pointing out at another instance, it has been held that “Remand to the Commissioner can also be affected in a case where the Commissioner rejects the application on a technical ground without recording its opinion on facts or genuineness of the activities and object of the Trust but the Tribunal finds ground for rejection on such technical ground thereby reopening the issue of recording satisfaction in terms of Section 12 (AA) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Institute of Chartered Accountants of India ( ICAI ) is organising Second Round of Campus Placement Programme in sixteen different cities.
Second Round Campus Placement Programme is a platform specifically designed and aims to provide placement opportunities to the Newly Qualified Chartered Accountants (NQCAs) who could not get a job during our main Placement Programme held in SepOct’19. This programme is an extended dimension to the existing initiative i.e Campus Placement Programmes, undertaken by CMI&B to provide employment opportunities to the Newly Qualified Chartered Accountants, organized twice a year.
ELIGIBILITY OF CANDIDATES FOR SECOND ROUND OF CAMPUS
NQCAs who could not get a job during our main Campus Placement Programme held in SepOct’19.
For Further Information Click here.
For Downloading the Brochure Click here.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed Goods and Services ( GST ) department to file or revise Tran-1 either electronically or manually.
The High Court was hearing a bunch of Petitions, which Petitioners are registered under Central/State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and seeking direction under Article 226 of Constitution of India to Respondents to permit carry forward of unutilized CENVAT credit of duty paid under Central Excise Act, 1944 and Input Tax Credit of VAT paid under PVAT Act, 2005 or HVAT Act, 2003 which could not be carry forwarded on account of non-filing or incorrect filing of prescribed statutory Form i.e. TRAN-1 by the stipulated last date i.e. 27.12.2017.
The division bench comprising of Justice Jaswant Singh and Justice Lalit Batra directed to permit the writ applicants to allow filing of declaration in form GST TRAN-1 and GST TRAN-2 so as to enable them to claim transitional credit of the eligible duties in respect of the inputs held in stock on the appointed day in terms of Section 140(3) of the Act.
The Court also ruled that, “the due date contemplated under Rule 117 of the CGST Rules for the purposes of claiming transitional credit is procedural in nature and thus should not be construed as a mandatory provision”.
While concluding the Judgment, the Court also directed Respondents to permit the Petitioners to file or revise where already filed incorrect TRAN-1 either electronically or manually statutory Form(s) TRAN-1 on or before 30th November 2019.
“The Respondents are at liberty to verify the genuineness of claim of Petitioners but nobody shall be denied to carry forward the legitimate claim of CENVAT / ITC on the ground of non-filing of TRAN-I by 27.12.2017”, the Court also added.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka has ruled that, TDS provision are not applicable to a cooperative society registered under the Karnataka State Co-operative Society Act, 2001 under GST from the payment made to it by vendors for providing/ procuring taxable goods and services for making its supplies.
The AAR was considering the question, whether the applicant falls under any of the categories of the persons mandated to undertake TDS deduction, under Section 51(1) of the COST Act 2017, on consideration of aforesaid relevant amendments?
The applicant entity was formed and registered under the Co-operative Society Act 1959, where the District Co-operative Milk Unions are shareholders of the applicant organisation. Further applicant is a taxable person under the GST Acts and the entire shareholding is with the district milk unions and not with the State Government of any State or the Central Government or any local authority. Hence it is not a department or an establishment of Central Government/ State Government/ local authority. Therefore applicant is not covered under clauses (a) & (b) of Section 51(1) of the CGST Act, 2017.
The AAR bench comprising of Harsh Dharna and Dr. Ravi Prasad M.P observed that, “In the instant case the applicant has not been established by national, regional or local governments but is registered under Co-operative Society Act 1959, which mandates certain supervisory / participation from the relevant Department of Karnataka State Government. The applicant has not been tasked with any responsibilities by the Government of Karnataka. The Directors have been nominated only to safeguard the funds of the said society. Therefore the applicant is not covered under clause ( c) of Section 51(1.) of the COST Act 2017. In view of the above, the applicant is not covered under any of the clauses of Section 51(1) of the CGST Act 2017 and hence is not liable to get registered to undertake TDS deduction”.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Reserve Bank of India ( RBI ) announces the opening of first cohort under the Regulatory Sandbox (RS) with ‘Retail Payments’, as its theme. The adoption of ‘Retail Payments’ as the theme is expected to spur innovation in digital payments space and help in offering payment services to the unserved and underserved segment of the population.
Migration to digital modes of making a payment can obviate some of the costs associated with a cash economy and can give customers a friction-free experience. The innovative products/services which, among others, shall be considered for inclusion under RS are as follows:
2. The format of Application for the RS is attached. The entities meeting the eligibility criteria as laid out in the framework may apply, along with information listed in Annex I (Fit and Proper criteria for Director(s)/Promoter(s) of sandbox entities) and Annex II (Declaration and Undertaking by Promoter/Director), for the first cohort under the RS. It may be noted that the live testing of new products or services in a controlled environment may require a bank/NBFC/any other partner for the testing to commence. In such cases, a suitable partner may be secured in advance to be eligible for admission to the RS.
3. The window for submission of application for the first cohort shall be open from November 15 to December 15, 2019. A scanned copy of the application, together with enclosures (maximum size 10 MB), may be forwarded through email and the hard copy, duly authenticated, may be sent to:
The Chief General Manager-in- Charge
Department of Regulation (FinTech Unit)
Central Office, 12th floor
Reserve Bank of India
Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg
Fort, Mumbai – 400 001
The Assam Gas Company Limited has invited applications from qualified Chartered Accountants for the following posts:
The Assam Gas Company Limited, an ISO 9001-2008 Company and a pioneer Public Sector undertaking.
The application form along with all relevant documents should be sent to the Managing Director, Assam Gas Company Limited, PO-Duliajan in an envelope clearly superscribing the Post applied for. The application should reach by 12/11/2019.
For Further Information Click here.
The Madras High Court has allowed the Transitional Credit of Education Cess, Secondary and Higher Education Cess and Krishi Kalyan Cess into the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ).
The petitioner is registered as an Assessee under the provisions of the Central GST and is a company providing Information Technology enabled services to customers worldwide. It has eight (8) units registered under the Act, five (5) units registered in Special Economic Zones (SEZ), two (2) units in Software Technology Parks of India (STPI) and one (1) unit in a Domestic Tariff Area (DTA).
Prior to GST, the petitioner was assessed to service tax and was availing CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services, utilizing the same against payment of service tax liability.
The petitioner followed the procedure for carrying forward CENVAT credit availed under the erstwhile regime, set out in terms of Rule 117 of the Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The Rules provide that every person entitled to the input tax credit under Section 140 shall submit a declaration electronically in Form GST Tran-1 within 90 days of the appointed date, being 01.07.2017, for carrying forward such credit to be utilised against turnover from taxable services.
The Revenue argued that the accumulated credit of EC, SHEC and KKC is dead and gone and there is nothing that the assessee could claim as having been carried forward. This argument is rejected. At the risk of repetition, accumulated credit cannot be said to have been wiped out unless there is a specific order under which it lapses. Though there may be embargos placed by the Statutes and Rules, such as the embargo against cross –utilisation placed by Rule 3(7)(b) of the CCR, the accumulated credit continue in the books of the assessee till specifically wiped out.
The Single Judge bench of Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth observed that, “I am of the view that the claim of the petitioner is liable to be accepted. Goods and Service Tax was introduced with much fanfare in 2017 with discussions preceding the enactment nearly from 2009 onwards. The scheme of Goods and Service Tax (GST) was to provide a comprehensive indirect tax levy subsuming various indirect tax enactments that had been in force prior thereto. Empowered committees were set up to deliberate extensively on the various details of the GST model to be implemented after taking into account the views of the State and Central Governments. The first discussion paper on GST in India set out the salient features that were incorporated in the report of the Thirteenth Finance Commission issued in December 2009. Prior to enumerating the Central and the State taxes to be integrated with GST”.
The Court also said that, “the taxes that had been subsumed were many and included among others, Central excise, Additional excise, Additional Customs Duty, all Central and State surcharges and cesses, Value Added Tax, Central Sales Tax, Entry Tax, Luxury Tax, Taxes on lottery, Entertainment Tax, Purchase Tax, State Excise Duties, Stamp Duty, Taxes on vehicles, Tax on goods and passengers, Taxes and duties on electricity as well as service tax. While integrating the taxes, the intention of the Government was evidently to provide a seamless model for transitioning of all credits hitherto availed of by an assessee under the erstwhile VAT and other indirect tax levies to the Goods and Service Tax regime as well. The benefits that had been made available and that had been permitted to continue in the erstwhile taxing regime were thus meant to be continued”.
While quashing the Assessing Officer’s Order, the Court also observed that, “the revenue has not made out any bar for the transitioning of EC, SHEC and KKC into the GST regime and the petitioner satisfies all conditions both under sub-section (1) and (8) of section 140. The embargo placed by Rule 3(7)(b) is long gone with the introduction of GST. Certainly, the powers-that-be are conscious of these factors in drafting the new legislation and the specific provision in question i.e., Section 140”.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Union Minister of Finance and Corporate Affairs, Smt Nirmala Sitharaman today unveiled two new IT initiatives – ICEDASH and ATITHI – for improved monitoring and pace of Customs clearance of imported goods and facilitating arriving international passengers by the electronic filing of Customs baggage and currency declarations. Minister of State, Finance and Corporate Affairs Shri Anurag Singh Thakur, Secretary (Revenue), senior officials of CBIC and members of trade and industry were present.
Speaking on the occasion at the CBIC’s DG Systems office here in New Delhi, Finance Minister lauded the measures taken by CBIC to leverage technology for providing better taxpayer services. She was particularly appreciable of the work being done in the Network Operation Centre and Security Operation Centre. Finance Minister also mentioned that the significant improvement in India’s global ranking in the Trading Across Border is in no small measure on account of the IT and other reforms carried out by CBIC. She also expressed optimism that both ICEDASH and ATITHI would be key drivers for further improvement especially as they reduce interface and increase the transparency of Customs functioning. She added that ATITHI would, in particular, create a tech-savvy image of India Customs and would encourage tourism and business travel to India. Finance Minister further urged the officers to develop IT-based insights for focused policymaking.
Shri Anurag Thakur commended the work being done by officers of DG Systems, CBIC and noted that the ATITHI app will facilitate hassle-free and faster clearance by Customs at the airports and enhance the experience of international tourists and other visitors at our airports. He added that the CBIC must strive to use technology in each sphere of its activity and while facilitating genuine business it must identify ways to detect and stop frauds especially in GST.
Dr Ajay Bhushan Pandey, Secretary (Revenue) stated that technology is key to improving governance in today’s times and acknowledged CBIC’s efforts in bringing technology to the forefront while also being serious about information security. Shri P.K. Das, Chairman, CBIC informed about CBIC’s steps to make the Department more IT savvy with an aim to further improve the ease of doing business.
About ICEDASH & ATITHI :
ICEDASH is an Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) monitoring dashboard of the Indian Customs helping the public see the daily Customs clearance times of import cargo at various ports and airports. With ICEDASH, Indian Customs has taken a lead globally to provide an effective tool that helps the businesses compare clearance times across ports and plan their logistics accordingly. This dashboard has been developed by CBIC in collaboration with NIC. ICEDASH can be accessed through the CBIC website.
With ATITHI, CBIC has introduced an easy to use mobile app for international travellers to file the Customs declaration in advance. Passengers can use this app to file a declaration of dutiable items and currency with the Indian Customs even before boarding the flight to India. ATITHI is available on both, iOS and Android.
A Chartered Accountant has filed a written complaint in Dibrugarh Police Station against all the Airlines operating in India.
The Complaint filed by Suresh Chandra Varma, professionally a Chartered Accountant alleged that, the Airlines operating in India are not refunding the GST and the Tax amount to the passengers who have not availed the flight or his flights have been cancelled.
He has also alleged that Indigo Airlines is charging Rs 50 for printing the tickets at the airport counter without issuing any receipt resulting in total GST amount fraud.
According to FIR, “On 02.11.2019 the Complainant. Suresh Chandra Verma has lodged an ejahar to be the effect that the accused Airline Company had a criminal breach of trust and cheated the passengers by fraudly non-refunding the ticket fare collected and taxes on them for flights non availed by the passengers. hence the case”.
It has been alleged in the FIR that this scam is of more than Rs 1000 crores.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Tamil Nadu bench of the Authority of Advance Rulings ( AAR ) in an application filed by Venkatasamy Jagannathan ruled that, the Profit Sharing Agreement between the applicant ad various shareholders of Star Health and Allied Insurance Ltd is an actionable claim and is as neither a supply of goods nor a supply of services covered under Schedule III to CGST Act and SGST Act and hence is not taxable to CGST or SGST.
The Applicant has entered into a Profit Sharing Agreement (PSA) and is entitled to a strategic sale of equity shares over and above a specified sale price per equity share by a set of shareholders of SHA and seeks a ruling on whether the PSA between the applicant as an employee and the shareholders, attract GST in his hands.
The applicant contended that the PSA is only due to his contribution as Managing Director and hence is under employer/employee activities which are exempt under GST.
The Bench constituting of members Ms MG Kata and TK Selvaan ruled that the PSA between the applicant and various shareholders of Company is an actionable claim and is neither a supply of goods nor a supply of services and hence is not taxable to CGST or SGST Act.
The Bench elaborated that in the instant case, the parties to PSA have agreed to pay a certain sum in the event of strategic sale where at least 51% of paid-up equity share capital of the company is sold at a price of Rs 75 per equity share. The applicant has a claim to specified amounts in event of the occurrence of the strategic sale making his claim contingent on happening of an event. Hence, the PSA was ruled to be an actionable claim.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Manappuram Finance Limited has invited application from qualified Chartered Accountants for the post of Finance / Budget Manager.
Manappuram Finance Ltd. is one of India’s leading gold loan NBFCs. Promoted by Shri. V.P. Nandakumar, the current MD & CEO, its origins go back to 1949 when it was founded in the coastal village of Valapad (Thrissur District) by his late father Mr. V.C. Padmanabhan. The firm was involved in pawn broking and money lending carried out on a modest scale. Shri Nandakumar took over the reins in 1986 after his father expired.
Job Description
Designation: Finance/Budgeting Manager
No of Posts: 10
Education-
PG:CA
For Further Information Click here.
The Karnataka Bench of Authority of Advance Rulings ( AAR ) in an application filed by M/s Jairaj Ispat ltd held that Dalochar is classifiable under Tariff Item 2619 00 90 leviable to 18%.
The classification of product– Dalochar is sought before the present Authority. The product is partly burnt coal (cinder) emerged during the manufacturing process of Iron ore. The physic-chemical properties of Dolochar reveal that it is a type of semi-coke and has poor was ability.
The applicant contends that the product proposed to be supplied falls under Entry 30 of notification No. 1/2017-ITR dated 28.06.2017 under the description ‘Other slag and ash, including seaweed ash (kelp); ash and residues from the incineration of municipal waste other than fly ash’ attracting a levy of IGST at 18%
The Bench constituting of Shri Harish Dharnia and Ravi Prasad held that Char Dolochar/Dolochar (waste emerging during the process of manufacturing Sponge Iron) supplied by the Applicant is classifiable under Tariff Item 26190090 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and in view of Entry 28 of Schedule III of Notification 01/2017-ITR attract GST of 18%.
The Bench further found that the view is supported by the Hon’ble CESTAT decisions of Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Hyderabad v Reactive Metals of India Pvt Ltd 2018 (8) GSTL 194 (Tri-Hyd) wherein it has been held that Dalochar emerges as a by-product in manufacturing of Sponge Iron and not a fuel manufactured from coal and cannot be classified under Tariff Item 2701 20 90 but under 2619 00 90.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Maharashtra Authority of Advance Rulings ( AAR ) in an application filed by Vertiv Energy Pvt Ltd held that supply of UPS systems along with the provision of services of its installation, testing and commissioning constitutes a composite supply.
The applicant engaged in the manufacturing of various UPS systems entered into a contract with Delhi Metro Railway Corporation (DMRC) for supply, installation, testing, and commission of UPS systems in 2014
The issue before the present Authority was whether the above contract entered into with DMRC by applicant qualifies as a supply of works contract u/s 2(119) of the CGST Act.
The Bench constituting of members B. Timothy and A.A. Chahure held that the contract would not qualify as a supply of works contract u/s 2(119) of the CGST Act since the same does not lead to the emergence of immovable property. The Bench found that the applicant first dispatches the goods to DMRC under an Invoice and E Way Bill. Hence, the title in property of the said goods is transferred as soon as the delivery is completed. It is after such delivery that the installation takes place.
Further, it has been held that the supply of UPS Systems by the applicant is the major part of the contract. These goods are delivered to the client by the applicant and such goods that are supplied are used by the applicant to provide services of installation, testing and commissioning of substations. The above hence is a Composite Supply.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment