Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update-07.12.2016

CHANGES IN SCHEDULE IV AND SCHEDULE V OF REVISED GST DRAFT LAW

CHANGES IN SCHEDULE IV AND SCHEDULE V OF REVISED GST DRAFT LAW
                                                        
We have till now discussed the definition of supply along with provisions described in schedule I, schedule II and schedule III, and in this update, we will discuss the changes and consequences in schedule IV and V.

Schedule IV:- In the previous GST Law, Schedule IV specified the activities or transactions in respect of which the Central Government, a State Government or any Local Authority shall not be regarded as a taxable person. However, in the revised GST Law, Schedule IV specified activities or transactions undertaken by the Central Government, State Government or any local authority which shall be treated neither as supply of goods nor supply of services. Although, the heading of the Schedule has been changed but it does not has significant impact with the only difference that earlier government was not considered as taxable person for certain activities while now the transactions will not be considered as supply of goods/services. It appears that the earlier language indicated that for certain transactions, government will not be taxable person but since there is concept of reverse charge mechanism, there was possibility of confusion. The new law removes the probability of any confusion as regards statutory functions performed by the government.
In the earlier GST draft Law, in case of ‘assignment of right to use any natural resource’ when such right was assigned by the Government or Local authority, onetime charges paid were made exempt but an explanation was provided wherein it was mentioned that the periodic payments made every year for the assignment of right to use any natural resource shall be liable to tax. This explanation has been removed from the revised law. Deletion of this explanation does not bring any change in taxability of the periodic payments as it is very much clear from the proviso itself that only one time charges shall be exempt. The explanation was merely for clarification purpose and removing the same does not bring any sort of change.

No other change has been made in the revised draft in context of this schedule and it has been kept identical to earlier law. Also it is worthwhile to mention that the provisions mentioned in these schedules are exactly parallel to current Service Tax Laws.

SCHEDULE V:- In the previous GST draft law, the persons to be registered were specified in schedule III but in revised GST law, these have been transferred to schedule V. Changes made therein are discussed hereunder:-

1.     In the revised GST Draft Law, there is substantial relaxation in the threshold limit for getting registered under GST Law. In earlier GST draft law, the limit for registration was nine lakh rupees which has been increased to twenty lakh rupees. It is an appreciable step from Government’s side. As already told by us in our earlier GST updates, this limit has been enhanced by GST council which is reflected in this revised GST update also.
 
2.     In revised GST draft law a new proviso has been inserted which reads as under:-
 
“PROVIDED that where such person makes taxable supplies of goods and/or services from any of the States specified in sub-clause (g) of clause (4) of Article 279A of the Constitution, he shall be liable to be registered if his aggregate turnover in a financial year exceeds ten lakh rupees.”
 
The insertion of this proviso reduces the threshold of registration if the taxable supplies are made from states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. The threshold of registration would be ten lakh rupees only instead of twenty lakh rupees.
 
3.     In new GST draft law the need of registration has been divided into two categories which is special category states and non special category states. For non special category the registration limit is as mentioned in above points and for the special category states the limit is ten lakh rupees. The government in earlier GST draft had explicitly specified that for the NE states including Sikkim the registration limit shall be four lakh rupees, but in new GST draft law though the limit for special category states has been increased but it is nowhere mentioned that special category states shall be North Eastern states including Sikkim. Hence, in future there is a possibility that government may specify a new list of states for this threshold limit.
  
4.     In the list of persons who are required to get registered irrespective of the threshold limit following entries have been added:-
 
a.     Persons who are required to pay tax under sub-section (4) of section 8, irrespective of the threshold specified under paragraph 1;
b.     Persons who are required to collect tax under 56, whether or not separately registered under the Act;
c.      Every person supplying online information and database access or retrieval services from a place outside India to a person in India, other than a registered taxable person.
 
Hence these people have to get registered even if they are not crossing the threshold limit. Looking into each entry separately:-
a.     The persons covered under section 8(4) are the electronic commerce operators supplying specified services.
b.     Every electronic commerce operator who is not an agent is required to collect tax at source and deposit it to government. Such operator is required to be registered under the GST Law without any threshold limit.
c.        A foreigner providing services of online information and database access services to a person in India shall also be required to register under this act. It is pertinent to mention that recently a similar provision was bought into current Service Tax laws. Therefore by bringing the parallel change in GST law government removes scope of any ambiguity.
 
5.     Lastly the entry relating to aggregator providing services under his brand name or his trade name has been removed from the list of person requiring registration irrespective of the threshold limit. Hence he shall not be required to get registered if threshold limit does not exceed the specified turnover.
 

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