Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update No 176 on exemption on service provided in relation to ASSET examination

GST Update No 176 on exemption on service provided in relation to ASSET examination
Bringing education sector under the preview of taxation has always been a sensitive issue since beginning as education is seen more as a social activity rather than commercial one. It is constitutional obligation of the government to provide free education and therefore, exemption has been provided in this respect. However, recently an issue was raised before the hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES PVT LTD V/S UNION OF INDIA as to whether conduct of examination by the applicant will be covered under the exemption granted with respect to services provided to the educational institutions. The petitioner filed application before AAR wherein it was held that the benefit of exemption notification is admissible to the petitioner. However, the revenue authorities filed appeal against the said order passed by AAR before Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling wherein the issue was decided against the assessee. Thereafter, aggrieved by the Order passed by the Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling, the present writ petition has been filed before the Rajasthan High Court. The decision imparted in this respect is subject matter of present update. The applicant is a private limited company engaged in products and solutions used in education segments. An advance ruling was sought as to whether the services by it to educational organisation related to ASSET examination is covered under exemption. It is mandatory for the students to give ASSET exams which are being conducted by schools in their own premises and marks are given after due weightage to the students ASSET score in semester and final exams. The exams can be taken either in online or in offline mode. The GAAAR rule out that the said activity is not exempted since services are not provided to the school and school is just a body by which fee is collected from the students, administration cost of which is provided to school. Reliance was placed on the “Flyer” issued by CBIC. CA. PRADEEP JAIN ??www.capradeepjain.com??pradeep@capradeepjain.com??5 The applicant therefore filed a Writ Application contending that GAAAR has erred in its approach without deliberating the difference between “assessment” and “examination”. It is further submitted that if the interpretation of the AAAR is adopted, it shall defeat the fundamental intent of Government to provide exemption to schools and colleges providing education facility. Reliance was placed on Circular No. 151/07/2021-GST dated 17.06.2021 issued by CBIC. Further, reliance was placed on the decision of West Bengal AAR in the case of ASHOK KUMAR BASU 2018(10) TMI, M/S. EDUTEST SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., GUJARAT AAR (2018 (10) TMI 201) AND M/S. THE BANGALORE PRINTING AND PUBLISHING CO. LTD., KARNATAKA AAR (2019 (11) TMI 157 wherein it was held that service to educational institution includes services relating to conduct of examination such as service of printing question papers is exempt from GST. The Counsel of respondent submitted that AAAR has lawfully and correctly imparted right order. It was argued that the word “relating to” used in the S. No. 66 of the Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017 cannot be interpreted in a manner to enlarge the scope of entry to include the ASSET within the scope. The Court held that the term “education” is not defined. Therefore, reference was made to the decision of Apex Court in the case of SOLE TRUSTEE, LOKA SHIKSHANA TRUST VS. CIT, (1976) 1 SCC 254 : AIR 1976 SC 10. It was held that the word education has a wider meaning covering all the matter related to imparting and controlling education. Reliance was further placed on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of K. SHYAM SUNDER (2011) 8 SCC 737 wherein it was held that examination is always considered as a best measure which revolves around education and evaluates the performance of the candidate. In the present case, the applicant is suppling ASSET to various educational institution which are covered under the definition of educational institution. It was stated that two conditions are to be satisfied to be eligible for the exemption. Firstly, the recipient of services should be educational institution and secondly the services should be in the nature of education. Further, it was held that the term “in relation to” has been a matter CA. PRADEEP JAIN ??www.capradeepjain.com??pradeep@capradeepjain.com??6 of interpretation in various courts. Reliance was placed on decision of Apex Court in the case of DOYPACK SYSTEMS (P) LTD VS UOI 1988 (36) ELT 201 SC wherein it was held that the said word carries a wider meaning. It was further held that it is well-settled that even in tax statutes, an exemption provision should be liberally interpreted to achieve the basic objective and intention of the exemption. Therefore, it was held that the services shall be exempt vide Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017. The above ruling is a sigh of relief for the taxpayers engaged in providing ancillary educational services. The above subject matter has been prone to litigations since inception as the Courts are flooded with number of cases on the same. To illustrate, in the case of MANAGEMENT & COMPUTER CONSULTANTS, WEST BENGAL AAR, it was held that no GST shall be leviable on services related to conduct of examination for education board. The above decision by Gujarat High Court is having a binding effect on the department. It is high time the authorities should follow these Judicial Pronouncements and avoid taking unreasonable steps resulting into harassment of tax payers.
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