Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Service tax penalty can’t survive when assessee acted on dept.’s own view of non-taxability: Delhi High Court. *  GST section 74 extended limitation questionable when form 26AS mismatch was already known: Karnataka High Court grants interim relief. *  CGST demand prima facie impermissible after state GST settlement under section 128A: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court asks GSTAT to sympathetically consider delay as taxpayers pursued remedy before wrong forum. *  Supreme Court stays Tripura High Court ruling protecting genuine buyers from ITC denial over supplier’s GST default. *  Diary entries alone can’t prove clandestine removal of goods: CESTAT quashes excise penalty on steel trader. *  Customs could investigate preferential tariff claims even before sec. 28DA: Delhi High Court. *  Customs dept. relied on fake AI generated case laws: supreme court quashes Rs. 425.28 crore penalty. *  No GST exemption in affiliation and annual registration charges for admission or conduct Of examinations: GSTAT. *  Mere invoices, cheque payments insufficient to establish genuine movement of goods: GSTAT restores Rs. 43.44 lakh ITC demand. *  Consolidated GST show cause notice covering multiple financial years is not without jurisdiction: Delhi High Court. *  Construction of independent houses on separate plots not taxable as ‘Residential Complex’ without common facilities: CESTAT. *  GST penalty exceeding statutory maximum unsustainable; Allahabad High Court quashes ? 50,000/- penalty after taxpayer filed return and paid late fee. *  GST order against standard chartered bank passed without hearing set aside by Bombay High Court. *  Retracted statements can’t be relied upon without cross-examination: CESTAT quashes gold confiscation. *  Burden to prove misclassification lies on customs department: CESTAT. *  CESTAT quashes Rs. 98 lakh excise demand on clearance of used refractory brick scrap. *  Service tax demand on irrigation works quashed: Karnataka High Court rules sale of goods component not taxable as service. *  GSTAT restores tax and penalty for transporting iron scrap without E-way bill citing intent to evade tax. *  Madras High Court stays GST recovery from directors without opportunity to show cause under section 89. *  Madras high court stays GST recovery notice against directors; finds prima facie case on applicability of section 79(1)(c). *  Procedural lapses can’t justify harsh punishment without serious customs breach: CESTAT quashes customs broker licence revocation. *  Service tax payable on land leasing and sports complex charges: CESTAT. *  Settled customs dispute can’t be reopened through Article 226 challenge to interest liability: Delhi High Court. *  Mere facilitation of customs clearance can’t establish knowledge of smuggling: Madras High Court. *  GST registration cancellation stayed: Allahabad High Court questions 99% ITC utilisation cap under rule 86B. *  Composition scheme lapses automatically on crossing Rs. 1.5 crore turnover: GSTAT. *  Gujarat High Court quashes GST cancellation orders after officer relied on non-existent AI-generated case laws. *  Importers liable for customs duty benefits availed through manipulated scrips: Delhi High Court. *  Procedural E-way bill lapse alone can’t justify penalty where genuine transaction and absence of tax evasion are established: GSTAT.
Subject News *  Documentary evidence dominates probe, further custody unwarranted: mumbai court grants bail in Rs. 22.44 crore customs duty evasion case. *  Business premises can’t remain sealed for non-participation in GST search: Allahabad High Court. *  GST pre-deposit must be refunded proportionately when taxpayer partly succeeds in appeal: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court grants 30 days to file GST appeal; keeps pre-deposit issue open due to deposit in parallel CGST proceedings. *  GST demand can’t exceed amount proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore order. *  Hundreds-of-crores GST demand and heavy 10% pre-deposit no ground to bypass statutory appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Delhi High Court refuses to entertain challenge to gold confiscation due to statutory appeal remedy and unexplained delay. *  Procedural error in customs broker licence inquiry can be rectified through remand: Delhi High Court. *  GSTR-2A mismatch alone can’t justify ITC denial without invoice-wise verification; personal hearing mandatory: GSTAT. *  GST order passed without uploading personal hearing notices violates sec. 75(4): Allahabad High Court. *  TAX EVASION - Sec. 74 GST SCN quashed for not spelling out fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression: Allahabad High Court. *  STPI’s SOFTEX certification and NoC charges taxable as business support services: CESTAT. *  Suspicion can’t replace proof: CESTAT quashes penalty in alleged gold-smuggling operation. *   Limitation runs from communication of order: Madras High Court upholds rejection of delayed GST Appeals. *  Rajasthan High Court quashes GST demand over unsigned show cause notice. *  ITC recovery upheld where supplier failed to deposit GST: Rajasthan High Court. *  Customs commissioner’s empowered to make port trust liable for duty on pilfered goods: Supreme Court. *  Rectification proceedings can’t be used to challenge an uncontested GST assessment through a writ petition: Andhra Pradesh HC. *  GST proceedings against deceased proprietor unsustainable without notice to legal heir: GSTAT. *  Mere availment of ineligible self-assessed ITC doesn’t amount to suppression without evidence of fraud or wilful misstatement: GSTAT. *  Disposal of mining overburden by entity authorised by mining lease holder constitutes taxable service: CESTAT. *  Toll plaza data not mandatory for ITC refund: GSTAT. *  Disputed GST fraud allegations require investigation: Punjab and Haryana High Court makes interim bail absolute in alleged fraud and GST fraud case. *  Non-manufacturer contractor liable to deposit excess excise duty collected from buyer: CESTAT. *  GST order can’t reject taxpayer’s reply as “not satisfactory” without reasons: Madhya Pradesh High Court. *  Uncorroborated statements can’t establish alleged diversion of duty-free goods: CESTAT. *  Erection services were not liable to service tax prior to 10th september 2004: CESTAT. *  Sec. 74 GST notice must spell out statutory ingredients for invoking extended tax demand proceedings: Allahabad High Court. *  No jurisdictional bar under section 6(2)(b) in parallel CGST SGST proceedings: Delhi High Court refuses to bypass GST appeal remedy. *  Madras High Court remits GST demand for fresh adjudication after taxpayer claims it was unaware of SCN following business closure.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST update 251 on levy of GST on educational conference organised by school

GST update 251 on levy of GST on educational conference organised by school
GST law has kept supply of certain goods and services as exempted including essential services such as health care services, educational services as it is statutory obligation of the Government to provide free education to the citizens of India. Recently, an issue was raised regarding admissibility of GST exemption on the educational conference organised by the school which was reported before Madhya Pradesh AAAR in the case ofM/S IN RE EMERALD HEIGHTS INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL SAMITI. The decision delivered in this regard is subject matter of discussion of our present update.
 
The appellant is registered as a Charitable Institution under Section 12AA of Income Tax Act and owns and runs The Emerald Heights International School. It is submitted that the society is not engaged in any other activity and does not have income other than the school. The school is not registered under GST since it is providing exempt services related to education. Further, it is affiliated with various National and International Organisations which are promoting education and sports worldwide. Amongst various organisations, it is a member of Association Round Square. The Association is an internationally diverse network of 200 like schools in 50 countries wherein they connect to world-class programmes, experiences, develop cultural networks, organises conferences etc. The appellant intends to enter into an agreement with the Association wherein the school shall be host of the conference in its own rights as a principal and not as an agent. Consideration for the above programmes shall flow from the Round Square to the appellant with the list of members and staff. The appellant sought advance ruling before AAR for which negative answers were received. The questions raised are as follows: -
1.     Will the consideration received by school from the participant school for participation of their students and staff be exempted vide S. No. 66 or 80 Vide Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017.
2.     If it is not exempted, in which category of service it shall fall and what will be tax rate?
3.     Whether any exemption is provided to service providers of catering, security, cleaning, housekeeping etc. to an educational institution up to higher secondary be available to service providers of the appellant?
4.     Whether ITC would be eligible of all input services availed for the purpose of conference?
 
The appellant submitted that AAR passed the ruling without appreciating the facts laid down since the AAR issued order in name of “Emerald Heights School” and held that the school is not registered under Section 12 AA. However, on the other hand, considering the actual scenario, the “society” is the “appellant”. Consequently, the exemption is denied to the appellant. It was submitted that the appellant is an educational institution and therefore, entitled to exemption under Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017. The appellant is providing services to students and teachers across the Globe who are also member of “Round Square”. Therefore, any services provided by educational institutions to its students, staff or faculty is exempted vide aforesaid Notification. Furthermore, since the appellant is an educational institution and therefore, the services provided to the appellant such as transportation, catering etc. are exempted. Also, no conditions are attached to the description of the said exemption. It is argued that the service provided by appellant stands exempted vide Entry no 80 of the said notification being services by way of coaching in recreational activities related to art, culture and sports by institution registered under Section 12AA of Income Tax Act.However, since the appellant needs to classify the nature of services under one single service head so as to claim exemption, it is submitted that the said service is exempted vide Entry No. 80 of the Exemption Notification.
 
The AAAR analysed the current scenario and held that the application made by the appellant clearly shows that the application was signed in the name of “Emerald School Heights (Runa and Owned by Emerald Heights School Samiti)”. It was stated that it is not the job of AAR/AAAR to investigate since they are not the fact-finding authorities. It is the duty of applicant to come clean hands. Further, any ruling obtained by fraud or suppression of facts may be declared void-ab-initio. The appellant in the present case declared and submitted that it is registered under Section 12AA of Income Tax Act. Further, it is evident that the charitable institution runs and owns the educational institution, practice of which exists during erstwhile GST regime. This is further explained by CBIC in its “e-version of GST Flyers at chapter number 39 of 51 chapters”. The purpose of conference is to provide recreational activity related to arts, culture or sports.Thus, it is crystal clear that service provided by conference related to training and coaching are covered under the said exemption notification and hence, not covered within the ambit of GST.  Therefore, question of category of service does not arises. As regards to input tax credit, since output tax liability stands exempted, the appellant is not eligible to avail input tax credit.
 
Although it is well known fact that advance ruling authorities are following pro-revenue approach yet, rulings like these in favour of taxpayers is what is the anticipated in future as well. Furthermore, Government ensures that every core educational service is fully exempt from GST and as in the present case, the educational conference was organised by school, no GST was payable on the same. It is also worth mentioning that although the AAAR held that the order passed by AAR is void due to wrong facts presented by the appellant, the decision was rendered on merits, that too, in favour of the appellant which is highly appreciated.
 
 
 
 
 
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