Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Missing seized records must be considered while testing ITC claim; duplicate GST demands ordered corrected: Delhi High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be rejected without addressing taxpayer’s grounds: Allahabad High Court. *  Surplus IGST credit can offset CGST, SGST shortfall: GSTAT. *  GST refund can’t be denied when cancelled airfares are returned with tax: GSTAT. *  3 Hearing notices issued within 2 minutes: Gujarat High Court flags portal flaw, seeks report. *  GSTR-9, GSTR-9C filing for FY 2025-26 enabled; pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B must be filed first. *  Dupattas are exempt fabrics, can’t be taxed as fibres at 4%: Madras High Court. *  Full transitional credit allowed on capital goods received after GST rollout: GSTAT denies Rs. 6.99 lakh export duty credit. *  GST return mismatch alone can’t justify fraud proceedings: GSTAT orders fresh adjudication under section 73. *  Supplier found non-existent later can’t alone justify input tax credit denial: GSTAT. *  GST interest stops once tax reaches government account, can’t run until return filing: GSTAT. *  Cancelled flat booking- GST refund can’t be denied without excluding COVID period from limitation: GSTAT. *  India notifies rules of origin for India–New Zealand FTA. *  Incomplete E-bike kits classifiable as complete vehicles, but not eligible for CKD duty concession: CESTAT. *  Same GST rate on main input and output can’t by itself bar inverted duty refund: GSTAT. *  Unjust enrichment doesn’t apply to customs refunds from assessments finalised before July 13, 2006: Gujarat High Court. *  CENVAT credit can’t be denied solely because plant And machinery are embedded in earth: Karnataka High Court. *  DFIA exports ineligible for RoDTEP benefits; customs directs repayment with applicable interest. *  Second E-Way bill alone doesn’t prove another supply: GSTAT. *  Bail denied in Rs. 1.19 crore fake GST refund case over risk of accused absconding again: Punjab and Haryana High Court. *  GST registration can be restored after revocation deadline if outstanding dues are paid: Gauhati High Court. *  Multiple GST proceedings over same suppliers: Calcutta High Court directs dept. to share findings for adjudication. *  E-Governance portal services not OIDAR, fixed deposit interest not taxable: CESTAT. *  Rs. 500 Stamp duty required on authority letters for CAs, CMA and GST practitioners in Pune GST division.  *  Rs. 1.10 crore GST refund must be paid in cash after business closure: Allahabad High Court. *  Godown rent attracts 18% GST even when used exclusively for exempt agricultural warehousing: AAR. *  GST portal launches "Multi-State Registration" facility: one master TRN for registration applications across multiple States/UTs. *  RoDTEP scheme extended till 31st December, 2026.  *  Mere disagreement with order can’t override Rs. 20 lakh appeal limit: GSTAT. *  Customs interest can’t be backdated before confiscation liability is determined; nearly 8 year period excluded: Delhi High Court.
Subject News *  GST summons: anticipatory bail maintainable without arrest order, but relief denied in evasion case: Allahabad High Court. *  GST Appeal can’t be decided without hearing taxpayer’s objections to fresh evidence: Allahabad High Court. *  GST ITC can’t be reversed merely because supplier grants discount without reducing tax liability: GSTAT. *  Mere quoting of GST provision is not a valid charge: GSTAT quashes ITC denial. *  Personal hearing mandatory before adverse GST order, even without taxpayer’s request: Rajasthan High Court. *  Parallel bail pleas without full disclosure amount to abuse of process Rs. 43.08 crore GST case sent for fresh hearing: Supreme Court. *  GST refund based on unchallenged advance ruling can’t be recovered using later circular: GSTAT. *  Payment of GST alone doesn’t end interest and penalty liability when tax and interest remain unpaid beyond 30 days of notice: GSTAT. *  GST demand over builders’ 80% procurement rule requires reasoned adjudication: GSTAT. *  Eligible ITC doesn’t automatically entitle taxpayers to compensation cess refund on domestic sales: GSTAT. *  GST confiscation order passed before reply deadline invalid: GSTAT. *  GST interest can’t be retained after tax refund on delayed export receipts: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be dismissed over pre-deposit shortfall without opportunity To respond: Bombay High Court. *  DGGI SCN can’t be challenged before reply and adjudication:Chhattisgarh High Court. *  GST input tax credit can’t be denied solely due to supplier’s retrospective registration cancellation: GSTAT. *  GST notice must explain fraud allegations; merely repeating section 74 Is not enough:  Himachal Pradesh High Court. *  Audit detection alone can’t justify GST fraud penalty; specific suppression must be proved: GSTAT. *  GST order uploaded only under ‘Additional Notices’ tab without separate intimation set aside: Calcutta High Court. *  Service Tax appeal can’t be rejected for missing pre-deposit proof when payment is already recorded: CESTAT. *  SGST dept. can’t hear appeal against CGST order: Calcutta High Court. *  Mere dispatch of tax order can’t prove service or make appeal time-barred: CESTAT. *  Dealer incentives can’t be taxed merely on ledger entries: CESTAT. *  DGFT orders quashed for failure to supply DRI letter relied upon in SCN: Bombay High Court. *  GST penalty u/s 122(1A) can’t apply to Pre-2021 transactions; unregistered beneficiaries also covered: Delhi High Court. *  Expired E-way bill caused by wrong PIN code can’t justify GST penalty without intent to evade tax: GSTAT. *  Used railway rails can’t be taxed as track material without proof they are fit for reuse: CESTAT. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand on different issue: Delhi High Court. *  ITC dispute involves no question of law: GSTAT directs appeal to Vice-President. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand On different issue: Delhi High Court. *  No E-way bill required for interstate goods movement in november 2017: GSTAT quashes detention and penalty.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST update - 29.12.2016 TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS-PART-VIII

GST DAILY DOSE OF UPDATION BY CA PRADEEP JAIN
TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS-PART-VIII
Section 175- Inputs removed for job work and returned on or after the appointed day
 
This section intends to enable the receipt of goods sent on job work before the appointed day but received back after the appointed day. Like the previous sections the time limit has been kept at 6 months from the appointed date to receive back such goods without payment of duty. The provision reads as follows:
Where any inputs received in a factory had been removed as such or removed after being partially processed to a job worker for further processing, testing, repair, reconditioning or any other purpose in accordance with the provisions of earlier law prior to the appointed day and such inputs, are returned to the said factory on or after the appointed day, no tax shall be payable if such inputs , after completion of the job work or otherwise, are returned to the said factory within six months from the appointed day.
 
The bold marked text is the only addition done in this para in comparison to old draft GST law. This is done so to clarify that the goods can be returned even without doing any job work. In absence of this provision, it could have been interoperated that only job worked goods can be returned back and if the inputs are returned as such without job work, then tax may become payable.
Apart from the above, 3 provisos from the old draft have been replaced to insert another proviso. The old provisos read as follows:
 
Provided further that tax shall be payable by the job worker if such inputs are liable to tax under this Act, and are returned after a period of six months or the extended period, as the case may be, from the appointed day:
 
Provided also that tax shall be payable by the manufacturer if such inputs are liable to tax under this Act, and are not returned within a period of six months or the extended period , as the case may be, from the appointed day.
 
This proviso lead to confusion that GST will be payable by job worker or manufacturer if goods are not returned in the stipulated time period. The literal meaning of this provision was that  the manufacture shall be liable to tax if goods are not returned within six months and if the goods are returned after the period of 6 months then the job worker will be liable to pay tax. On completion of exact 6 months, goods are not returned then manufacturer has to pay the duty. Now after 6 month, the job worker has to return the goods then he has to pay GST once again. Now, GST is paid twice on same goods. firstly by principal supplier and then by job worker. Even this was also not clear from these provision in old GST law whether the credit will be available to job worker of the GST paid by principal supplier.
Even we see the provision in current Cenvat credit Rules, 2004 then manufacturer has to reverse the cenvat credit taken on inputs and when the goods are returned after 180 days then credit is to be taken once again. These are very good provision.
 The new proviso substituted reads as follows:
PROVIDED FURTHER that if such inputs are not returned within a period of six months or the extended period , as the case may be, from the appointed day the input tax credit shall be liable to be recovered in terms of section 184.
 
Thus now in event of non return of goods within the stipulated time, section 184 will come into play for the recovery of tax. The section reads as follows:
Where in pursuance of an assessment or adjudication proceedings instituted, whether before, on or after the appointed day, under the earlier law, any amount of tax, interest, fine or penalty becomes recoverable from the taxable person after the appointed day, the same shall be recovered as an arrear of tax under this Act and the amount so recovered shall not be admissible as input tax credit under this Act.
 
Thus to conclude the tax on late returned goods will be deemed as a arrear of tax under this act and subsequently no input tax credit will be admissible under this act. Thus, if the inputs are not returned within 6 months then credit will be lapsed.
 
Hence it is advised to job worker that he should return the goods within 6 months of appointed day whether job work is done or not.
 
 
You may visit us at  www.capradeepjain.com
https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com