Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE No 116 ON ITC ADMISSIBILITY ON RENTING OF VEHICLES HAVING SEATING CAPCACITY BELOW 13 PERSONS

GST UPDATE No 116 ON ITC ADMISSIBILITY ON RENTING OF VEHICLES HAVING SEATING CAPCACITY BELOW 13 PERSONS
The issue regarding availability of input tax credit (ITC) on renting/hiring of motor vehicles has been contentious issue since inception. It was believed that there would be less disputes as regards ITC admissibility in GST regime as the law was formulated with the idea of providing seamless flow of ITC. However, the restrictions imposed vide section 17(5) has defeated the basic idea of seamless flow of credit and has ignited humongous litigation. Recently, we had discussed in detail the admissibility of ITC in case of hiring of buses by employer for transportation of employees and it was held by UP AAR in the case of DR WILLMAR SCHWABE (I) PRIVATE LIMITED that ITC is admissible in such cases. However, recently Tamil Nadu AAR in the case of NEW PANDIAN TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED [ORDER NO. 43/AAR/2021 dated 30.11.2021] considered the issue as regards availability of ITC on motor vehicles having seating capacity of less than 13 persons when rented to another company for transportation of its employees. The outcome of this decision is the subject matter of discussion of the present update. The applicant is engaged in transporting passengers as a rent-a-cab operator by providing the motor vehicle on hire or rental basis, either directly to the passengers or to the organisations for transportation of their employees. They are presently classifying their services under SAC 996601 under rent-a-cab operator and paying GST at the rate of 5% without availing facility of ITC. They have entered into agreement with Amazon to provide motor vehicles having seating capacity of less than 13 persons for transportation of its employees. Similarly, they are also providing renting of motor vehicles for transporting the employees of a SEZ unit. They have sought advance ruling as regards admissibility of ITC for goods or services used in providing the service of renting of motor vehicles. Their main contention is that as per provision contained in section 17(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, ITC on motor vehicles having approved seating capacity of less than 13 persons is restricted except when motor vehicles are used for further supply of such motor vehicles. It is being pleaded that as per definition of supply given under section 7 of the CGST Act, supply includes rental, lease and so the activity of renting of motor vehicles is covered by the exception carved out in the law. Moreover, it is also pleaded that ultimately, what is rendered by it is the service of transportation of passengers which is also covered by the exception and so merely because the agreement is entered for renting of motor vehicles to the company, it cannot lead to classification of the said service as lease rentals rather than transportation of passenger service. As regards supply of renting of motor vehicles made to SEZ unit is concerned, it is stated that it is taxable supply being zero rated supply and the ITC is available on the same also. The applicant also pointed that section 17(5)(a)(B) permits ITC on motor vehicles used for making taxable supplies of “transportation of passengers” and does not distinguish between a service provider of transporting passengers directly or engaged in transporting employees of an organisation by hiring or letting. Reliance was placed on the decision given in the case of M/S NARSINGH TRANSPORT by AAR Madhya Pradesh. The counsel for the department contended that the only exceptions for availing ITC on motor vehicles is further supply of such motor vehicle, transportation of passengers or imparting training or driving on such motor vehicles. As the renting/hiring of motor vehicles is not covered under exception, ITC is not available to the applicant. It was also pleaded that as applicant has opted for paying GST @5% without ITC facility, they are unable to avail any ITC. The AAR concluded that after perusing the agreements, it is found that the supply is restricted to the vehicle with drivers. The usage, i.e., Trip Schedules, routes, etc are done by the Transport team of the Vendor. The applicant is responsible for supplying the services of 'Rent-a -cab', wherein the vehicle with the driver is supplied to the vendor, who uses such services received from the applicants for the transporting requirement of their staff/officers. Hence, the service provided is “renting of vehicles with operators” falling under SAC 9966. As regards contention that the activity is covered under “further supply of such motor vehicles”, AAR held that the phrase means that ITC is available if the motor vehicles is sold as it is and the activity of renting/leasing cannot be considered as supply of such motor vehicle. Moreover, as the decision regarding route, nodal points for transport, staff to be plied etc. istaken by the Amazon company, the activity of transportation is being carried out by Amazon company and not the applicant. The applicant is only engaged in renting/leasing of motor vehicles which is not eligible for ITC under any of the exceptions to section 17(5). On similar analogy, AAR concluded that no ITC could be availed even for transporting employees of the SEZ unit. The above cited decision delves deep into the interpretation as regards exceptions to admissibility of ITC on motor vehicles having approved seating capacity of less than 13 persons. As per section 17(5), ITC on such motor vehicles is restricted except when used for further supply of such motor vehicles or used for transportation of passengers. The reasoning adopted for the case being not covered under further supply of such motor vehicles is convincing. However, the contention of the applicant as regards admissibility of ITC as it is used for transportation of passengers appears to be logical. If the provision of section 17(5) is interpreted literally, ITC is inadmissible on motor vehicles except when they are used for making taxable supply of transportation of passengers. In the present case, although technically the applicant is providing renting of motor vehicle service but if ultimately the said service is being used for transportation of passengers, the benefit of ITC should be allowed. The intention of the government for carving out exceptions is that the persons engaged in business of supplying motor vehicles or ancillary services should be allowed to avail ITC with respect to motor vehicles. In our opinion, observing the intention of the legislature, merely because there is no specific entry for the activity of renting/leasing of motor vehicles, the genuineness of availing ITC cannot be ignored. It is hoped that suitable amendment is carried out in the exceptions so as to commensurate the provision with the intention of the 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