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 242 on availability of ITC on demo cars

GST Update No 242 on availability of ITC on demo cars
The availability of Input Tax Credit on demo cars has been a matter of extensive litigations and disputes since inception of GST regime. The confusion in this respect prevails in the minds of taxpayer day in and day out. Despite of various advance rulings are sought by the aggrieved applicants, it is quite disheartening that the issue under consideration has not come to an end. Once again, one more advance ruling was reported in the same beeline before West Bengal AAR in the case of M/s Toplink Motorcar Private Limited. The decision imparted in this case is subject matter of our present update. The applicant is an authorised dealer of Hyundai Motor India Limited for supply of various ranges of motor vehicles and carrying on business activities as an authorised service station. The applicant submitted that the vehicles were purchased against the tax invoices and are capitalised in the books of accounts. The vehicles are displayed as demo cars for customers to make them understand the features of vehicles. Advance ruling was sought by the applicant as to whether the input tax credit shall be available in respect of outward sale of vehicle. The applicant submitted that the demo cars purchased are an essential part of marketing and sales and promotion to facilitate sale of cars. Reliance was placed on various advance rulings such as M/s Titania Products Private Limited, M/s Titan Motocorp, M/s Singhania Future Private Limited wherein the Jharkhand AAR delivered that Input credit can be availed on demo cars subject to certain prescribed conditions which are as follows: - 1. Maximum of one demo car of each model must be maintained by the company till final disposal and before acquiring new demo car. Further, it should be shown as capital goods. 2. No depreciation is to be claimed on it. 3. GST Liability is to be created upon sale of demo car u/s 18 4. Separate account is to be prepared of inward and outward supply of demo cars along with balance sheet and P&L. Reliance was also placed on the advance ruling pronounced in the matter of Chowgule Industries (P) Ltd and decision of Kerala AAR in the case of M/s A.M. Motors wherein it was delivered that no restriction is imposed u/s 17 of CGST Act, 2017 and thereby, input tax credit can be availed by the taxpayer. The Revenue refrained from expressing any view in this respect. The AAR observed that applicant is engaged in business of supplying cars to the customers for which demo cars are also purchased for demonstration/ test drive purpose. The demo cars are kept with applicant only for limited purpose. In this respect, it was held that a test dive policy was furnished by the applicant wherein usage time of demo cars is to be 12 months from the date of approval. These demo cars are supplied further at applicable tax rates once the test drive period is over. Reference was made to Section 16 and 17 of CGST Act, 2017. It was held that the applicant maintains a stock of demo vehicle and thereafter supplies the same at lower price. Further, in accordance with the restriction u/s 17 (5)(a)(A) of CGST Act, 2017 i.e. ITC shall be available provided supplier is engaged in making further supply. However, since no there is no time limit prescribed for making further supply, ITC shall be available to the taxpayer being in the course and furtherance of business. Further, the word “such” in the said Section bears a wide connotation and does not put any restriction in respect of supply of demo cars. Therefore, it was concluded that the input tax credit in this respect can be claimed by the applicant concerned. The above ruling although being in favour of the trade and industry has once again increased the burden of taxpayers and does not serve the desired objective. There had been various divergent rulings pronounced by the AAR as regards to the subject matter. To illustrate, Haryana AAR in the case of M/sBMW India Pvt. Ltd., M/s Platinum Motocorp LLP delivered that input tax credit shall not be available on demo cars. Although it is well known that the advance rulings are pro-revenue, however, a due clarification from Government’s end is what is anticipated at the earliest possible to put an end to these unwanted litigations in the near future. Failing this, the assesses will continue to suffer the ill-effects and harassments from the revenue department in addition to high cost of litigation.
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