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 No 229 on proposed change in formula for refund of inverted duty structure

GST Update No 229 on proposed change in formula for refund of inverted duty structure
A new concept of granting refund where accumulation of credit is on account of rate of tax on inputs being higher than the rate of tax on output was introduced in GST law with a view to provide relief to the sectors covered under inverted duty structure. However, there has been ambiguity as regards refund claim since inception as regards the formula is concerned and the fact that input services and capital goods are not considered while computing the refund claim under this mechanism. Moreover, the Supreme Court decision in the case of V.K.C. FOOTSTEPS INDIA PVT. LTD. has added fuel to the fire of litigation by holding that the formula prescribed for the computation of refund claim is faulty as it seeks to discriminate amongst the assessees having credit of inputs in their electronic credit ledger as compared to those having credit of input and input services both in their electronic credit ledger. The Apex Court had mentioned in the order that the GST Council should consider revising the formula of computation of refund of accumulated credit under the inverted duty structure. The recently held 47th GST Council meeting has proposed amendment in the said formula which is the subject matter of discussion of our present update. 
 
The hon’ble Supreme Court stated in its order that a possible solution for removing the anomaly in the formula can be that the Rule itself provides for a statutory assumption or a deeming fiction of utilisation of certain percentage of ITC on input services towards the payment of output tax for the purpose of calculation of refund. Our GST update no. ………. on analysis of the SC decision may be referred for the sake of better understanding. It appears that the GST Council has accepted the suggestion put forth by the Supreme Court and has proposed the following amendment in the recently held GST Council Meeting:-
 
Amendment in formula prescribed in sub-rule (5) of rule 89 of CGST Rules, 2017 for calculation of refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit on account of inverted rated structure
a. Change in formula for calculation of refund under rule 89(5) to take into account utilization of ITC on account of inputs and input services for payment of output tax on inverted rated supplies in the same ratio in which ITC has been availed on inputs and input services during the said tax period. This would help those taxpayers who are availing ITC on input services also.
 
Although, the notification proposing the amendment has not been released till date but an attempt is being made to explain the change that has been proposed to be implemented in the formula. To have an in-depth clarity, the amendment can be understood with the help of following example:
 
Details of Outward Supplies:
S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs.)
1. Turnover of inverted duty structure 500 Lakhs
2. GST @ 5% 25 Lakhs
3. Turnover of other supply 700 Lakhs
4. GST @ 28% 196 Lakhs
5. Total Adjusted Turnover 1200 Lakhs
 
Details of Inward Supplies:
S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs.)
1. 12% inputs 12 Lakhs
2. 28% inputs 56 Lakhs
3. Input Services 18 Lakhs
4. Capital Goods @28% 14 Lakhs
 
Refund as per Existing Formula:
Maximum Refund Amount= {(Turnover of inverted rated supply of goods and services) x Net ITC / Adjusted Total Turnover} - tax payable on such inverted rated supply of goods and services.
Net ITC would comprise of 12% inputs and 28% inputs because input services and capital goods are not eligible for consideration in the formula.
Therefore, refund amount shall be = (500/1200 * 68) - 25= 3.33 Lakhs
 
Considering the present situation, refund amounting to Rs. 3.33 Lakhs shall be granted to the taxpayers subject to the balance available in the electronic credit ledger. However, in case proposed formula is taken into consideration, following shall be calculation of refund amount:
The ratio of input and input services for payment of output tax is 68:86.
Therefore, maximum Refund Amt = (500/1200*68) – (25 * 68/86) = 8.56 Lakhs
 
From the above computation, it is crystal clear that refund sanctioned in the old formula is Rs. 3.33 Lakhs, which is lesser as compared to the amended formula being Rs. 8.56 Lakhs; which is a welcoming initiative from the government.
It is pertinent to mention here that the recent decision taken by the GST Council in the 47th meeting convened on 28th and 29th June as regards to change in formula for calculation of refund is a ray of hope for the taxpayers wherein the taxpayers will get more refund as compared to earlier designed formula. However, the next question prevailing in the minds of taxpayers will be whether the proposed change shall be applicable retrospectively or prospectively. Let’s wait for the notification to be issued in this case so that more clarity can be obtained by the taxpayers.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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