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 256 on GST implications on administration of Covid-19 vaccines

GST Update No 256 on GST implications on administration of Covid-19 vaccines
It is well known fact that health care sector is one of the most sensitive sectors wherein levy of GST is prone to litigation as the ultimate intention of the government is to provide free medical facilities to the citizens of the Country. The outbreak of Covid-19 placed a need to safeguard the interests of the citizens and after several clinical trials, vaccination drive being one of the significant leaps in India’s public health started to play its role. However, doubts were in the minds of assessees as to whether the said supply shall be covered under Health Care Services and thus, exempted from levy of GST. Recently, one case was reported before Andhra Pradesh AAR in the case of M/S KRISHNA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES LIMITED wherein it was enquired as to whether administering of COVID-19 vaccination by hospitals is supply of good or supply of service. The decision imparted in this case is the subject matter of discussion of our present update.
 
The appellant is a multi-specialty hospital engaged in rendering health care services which are exempted vide Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017. The company also supplies pharmacy based on prescription to outdoor patients on which tax is levied. The company was permitted to administer the Covid-19 vaccine. The process of administration of vaccine was explained in detail specifying that health care personnel who administers vaccine should be authorised medical practitioner and should have received competency-based training on vaccine administration. The Government’s institute i.e. NEGVAC will guide the aspects of covid-19 vaccine. Further, it was stated that administration process involves pre-vaccine, vaccination and post-vaccination process. The appellant sought an advance ruling on following issues:
1.     Whether the administration of Covid-19 vaccination by hospitals is supply of goods or supply of services?
2.     Whether administration of vaccine qualify as “health care service” and thereby stand exempted from levy of tax?
3.     Whether administrating of Covid-19 vaccine by clinical establishment is exempt under GST?
 
The appellant referred to definitions of goods, services, composite supply and healthcare-services as defined under Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017. It was further submitted that vaccines vial is not available for sale by pharmacy and the beneficiaries are not at liberty to get vaccinated by themselves or by any other person other than medical professional. Further, the beneficiaries visit hospital to get vaccination directly injected into the body. Therefore, it should not be considered as supply of goods. Further, various activities undertaken during the process of vaccination were considered concluding that the vaccination involves combination of supply of goods and services and thereby it is termed as composite supply. As regards to health care services, it was argued that the process is undertaken for the care of beneficiaries to develop their immunity against the chronic illness and hence, it shall stand exempted being health care service vide Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax Rate.
 
The AAR discussed as to whether administering of Covid-19 vaccine by hospital is supply of goods or services or both. It was concluded that there are two activities in the transaction, sale of vaccine being supply of goods and administering of vaccine being supply of service. Therefore, in the present case it is composite supply which is naturally bundled and principal supply being supply of goods since it is a choice of recipient which vaccine to be injected i.e. Covishield or Covaxin. Therefore, sale of vaccine shall be chargeable at the rate of 5%. As far as exemption is concerned, it is stated that inpatient services are exempted under GST and supply of vaccine is nowhere covered under inpatient services. Therefore, the given supply is not exempted under Health Care Services.
 
The above decision is yet another example to support the fact that advance ruling authorities are following pro-revenue approach and delivering adverse rulings. It is pertinent to mention here that recently the Apex Court in the case of Mohit Minerals V/s Union of India delivered that it is not possible to bifurcate the service portion in a composite supply so as to levy GST on the said service portion separately. However, it is extremely disheartening that the lower authorities are not following the analogy adopted by the Apex Court. In the present case, the principal supply in the composite supply of administering of COVID-19 vaccine is the health care service and not sale of vaccine. Consequently, levy of 5% GST on such vaccines is totally unjustifiable. Moreover, COVID-19 vaccines were being provided free of cost to the individuals and so the transaction should not be considered as supply in the first place itself as it lacks consideration. As such, no GST should be leviable on this transaction.
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