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 No. 105 ON ANALYSIS OF ITC ADMISSIBILITY ON HIRING OF MOTOR VEHICLE

GST UPDATE No. 105 ON ANALYSIS OF ITC ADMISSIBILITY ON HIRING OF MOTOR VEHICLE
In our earlier update, we had discussed the favourable ruling pronounced by UP AAR in the case of DR WILLMAR SCHWABE (I) PRIVATE LIMITED wherein it was held that the ITC with respect to hiring of motor vehicles is available to the applicant. In the present update, we seek to discuss the detailed reasoning behind the favourable decision pronounced by the UP AAR in light of the amended provisions contained in section 17(5) of the CGST Act, 2017. In order to understand the interpretation of the provision, the relevant extracts are produced for the sake of convenient reference as follows:- (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 16 and sub- section (1) of section 18, input tax credit shall not be available in respect of the following, namely:— (a) motor vehicles for transportation of persons having approved seating capacity of not more than thirteen persons (including the driver), except when they are used for making the following taxable supplies, namely:— (A) further supply of such motor vehicles; or (B) transportation of passengers; or (C) imparting training on driving such motor vehicles; (ab) services of general insurance, servicing, repair and maintenance in so far as they relate to motor vehicles, vessels or aircraft referred to in clause (a) or clause (aa): Provided that the input tax credit in respect of such services shall be available— (i) where the motor vehicles, vessels or aircraft referred to in clause (a) or clause (aa) are used for the purposes specified therein; (ii) where received by a taxable person engaged— (I) in the manufacture of such motor vehicles, vessels or aircraft; or (II) in the supply of general insurance services in respect of such motor vehicles, vessels or aircraft insured by him; (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 or both is used by a registered person for making an outward taxable supply of the same category of goods or services or both or as an element of a taxable composite or mixed supply; (ii) membership of a club, health and fitness centre; and (iii) travel benefits extended to employees on vacation such as leave or home travel concession: Provided that the input tax credit in respect of such goods or services or both shall be available, where it is obligatory for an employer to provide the same to its employees under any law for the time being in force. After reading the above provision, following points are worth noting:- 1. The restriction as regards availment of ITC on motor vehicles used for transportation of persons is only with respect to motor vehicles having approved seating capacity of 13 passengers with certain exceptions. Consequently, there is no restriction as regards availment of ITC on motor vehicles having approved seating capacity exceeding 13 persons. 2. Similarly, the restriction as regards availment of ITC on various services relating to motor vehicle such as of general insurance, servicing, repair and maintenance is also with respect to motor vehicles referred to in clause (a) being motor vehicles having approved seating capacity of 13 persons. Hence, there is no restriction in availment of such services in relation to motor vehicles having approved seating capacity exceeding 13 persons. However, with respect to motor vehicles having approved seating capacity of 13 persons, the ITC may be availed only if such motor vehicles are being used for specified purposes or such services are availed by general insurance service provider/manufacturer of such motor vehicle. 3. It is pertinent to mention that even the restriction of credit availment with respect to leasing, renting or hiring of motor vehicles is for motor vehicles having approved seating capacity of 13 persons as referred to in clause (a) and not for motor vehicles having approved seating capacity exceeding 13 persons. As such, there is no prohibition for availing input tax credit with respect to motor vehicle such as bus having approved seating capacity exceeding 13 persons, whether it be credit of purchase of bus or credit of various input services received as stated above. 4. There are two exceptions for availing the ITC of motor vehicles with approved seating capacity of 13 persons:- (i) If said services are used for providing an outward supply of same category of service. (ii) If said services are obligatory on part of employer to provide it for employees under any law for the time being in force. It is pertinent to mention here that as far as availability of credit under 4(i) is concerned, it is worth pointing out that the rate notification no. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 prescribing GST rate of 5% specifies condition that the ITC on goods or services used in supplying the service has not been taken. However, this condition is applicable for the service provider providing services of transportation of passengers. In case where the motor vehicle has been hired for the benefit of employees by the employer, no GST is payable by the employer on the recovery made from employees as the employer is not engaged in providing transportation of passenger service in usual course of business. Moreover, as per notification no. 29/2019-Central Tax dated 31.12.2019, services provided by way of renting of motor vehicle designed to carry passengers where cost of fuel is included in the consideration charged is liable to GST under reverse charge if the services are received by a body corporate. One may ponder as to whether the ITC would be available to the employer if tax is paid under reverse charge mechanism? The answer is in affirmative as restriction is only on the service provider providing transportation of passenger service and not to the recipient body corporate paying GST under reverse charge mechanism. As far as the admissibility of ITC under 4(ii) is concerned, it is worth mentioning that an adverse view was taken by Gujarat AAR in the case of M/s TATA MOTORS LTD. as far as admissibility of ITC on canteen facility provided to employees under mandate of the Factories Act, 1948. We had made an extensive analysis on the said decision in our earlier update wherein we disagreed with the reasoning adopted by the AAR wherein it was held that the exception carved out for the obligation under any Law is not applicable for outdoor catering services. Likewise, we are of the opinion that where the renting/hiring of motor vehicles is under statutory obligation of the employer, for example, Shops and Establishments Act requires compulsory transport facility to women working late night, the ITC is admissible even if the motor vehicle is having approved seating capacity of 13 persons. The above analysis seeks to answer all the possible doubts arising as regards admissibility of ITC on the services of hiring of motor vehicles availed by the assessee under GST Law.
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