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 302 ON NON-EXTENSION OF EXEMPTION ON FREIGHT PAID ON EXPORT:-

GST UPDATE No 302 ON NON-EXTENSION OF EXEMPTION ON FREIGHT PAID ON EXPORT:-
 
The expiry of the exemption available to ocean freight and air freight paid on export of goods as on 30.09.2022 has been the talk of the town. Notification no. 02/2018-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018 prescribed the exemptions till 30th September, 2018 in relation to service by way of transportation of goods by aircraft or by a vessel from India to a place outside India. This exemption was further extended upto 30.09.2022 vide Notification No. 07/2021-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 30.09.2021. However, the exemption has not been extended further so the trade and industry is concerned about the levy of GST on the said services. The analysis of the provisions in this regard is the subject matter of discussion of our present update.
 
The consequences of not extending the exemption to the freight paid on exports are that the taxpayers will have to pay IGST on the said transactions in view of the following provisions contained in CGST Act and IGST Act, 2017. In cases of exports, the service provider (shipping agency) and the service recipient (exporter) are located in India. As regards determination of place of supply is concerned, it is submitted that the provision contained in the proviso to section 12(8)(b) of the IGST Act, 2017 is relevant which reads as follows:-
 
(8) The place of supply of services by way of transportation of goods, including by mail or courier to, –
(a) a registered person, shall be the location of such person;
(b) a person other than a registered person, shall be the location at which such goods are handed over for their transportation.
Provided that where the transportation of goods is to a place outside India, the place of supply shall be the place of destination of such goods.
 
It is further worth mentioning that the provisions contained in section 7(5) of the IGST Act, 2017 are also relevant for the purpose of determination of tax liability on freight paid on export of goods.
(5) Supply of goods or services or both,––
(a) when the supplier is located in India and the place of supply is outside India;
(b) to or by a Special Economic Zone developer or a Special Economic Zone unit; or
(c) in the taxable territory, not being an intra-State supply and not covered elsewhere in this section,
shall be treated to be a supply of goods or services or both in the course of inter-State trade or commerce.
 
After analysing the above provisions, it is found that the service provider is located in India and the place of supply as stated above is outside India so the transaction is to be considered as inter-state supply of services. However, in the present case, the service recipient is also located in India. Now, the question that arises is that whether the above provision in section 7(5)(a) of the IGST Act, 2017 indicates export transactions or is also applicable for transactions where supplier and recipient both are located in India? As per section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017, meaning of zero-rated supply has been given which includes export of services as defined in section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017. It is submitted that when export of services are separately defined and are treated under zero rated supply, the provision contained in section 7(5)(a) of the IGST Act, 2017 cannot be considered to have been intended to indicate reference to export of goods or services. Therefore, the scope of the provision contained in section 7(5)(a) of the IGST Act, 2017 is very wide and it covers within its ambit the transactions where the service provider and service recipient are located in India with place of supply outside India. Hence, GST will be leviable on the ocean freight paid on exports @ 5% and also on the air freight @18% w.e.f. 01.10.2022.
 
It is worth mentioning that such transactions in negative list regime of service tax were not liable to service tax on the premise that when place of supply is outside India, the transaction is undertaken outside the taxable territory. There was no such concept of inter-state supplies but the provisions of GST law differ in this respect. Although, the GST law is applicable to whole of India and also defines the term “taxable territory” under section 2(109) of the CGST Act, 2017 as territory to which the

provisions of this Act apply. However, as detailed above that in view of the provision contained in section 7(5)(a) of the IGST Act, 2017, the transaction of freight paid on export is considered as inter state supply and there is no specific exemption prevailing after 01.10.2022, the said transaction would be liable to IGST. The contention that GST should not be levied as place of supply is outside India, being in non-taxable territory would not be feasible.

 

Now, another issue that arises is the admissibility of ITC to the service recipient, being the exporter. It is to be noted that the shipping agencies mention the place of supply as “Non Taxable Territory” in the invoice issued by them. Consequently, it is probable that the transaction reflected in GSTR-2B of the recipient will tag it under “ineligible ITC”. Although, in our opinion, the ITC of the IGST so paid on export freight should be available to the exporter as the intention of the government has always been to incentivize exports but often the admissibility of ITC is disputed by the revenue authorities on such grounds. The leading shipping agencies such as DHL Logistics Pvt. Ltd. have already issued advisory regarding levy of IGST on the export freight charged by them. The intention to tax such transactions is also fortified from the news being reported that the said exemption was being granted in the initial years due to difficulties faced by the exporters in claiming refunds from the government but as the refund mechanism has been streamlined, the government has not extended the exemption on export freight. It is hoped that the government issues a clear cut clarification on this issue in the interests of exporters. 

provisions of this Act apply. However, as detailed above that in view of the provision contained in section 7(5)(a) of the IGST Act, 2017, the transaction of freight paid on export is considered as inter state supply and there is no specific exemption prevailing after 01.10.2022, the said transaction would be liable to IGST. The contention that GST should not be levied as place of supply is outside India, being in non-taxable territory would not be feasible.

 

Now, another issue that arises is the admissibility of ITC to the service recipient, being the exporter. It is to be noted that the shipping agencies mention the place of supply as “Non Taxable Territory” in the invoice issued by them. Consequently, it is probable that the transaction reflected in GSTR-2B of the recipient will tag it under “ineligible ITC”. Although, in our opinion, the ITC of the IGST so paid on export freight should be available to the exporter as the intention of the government has always been to incentivize exports but often the admissibility of ITC is disputed by the revenue authorities on such grounds. The leading shipping agencies such as DHL Logistics Pvt. Ltd. have already issued advisory regarding levy of IGST on the export freight charged by them. The intention to tax such transactions is also fortified from the news being reported that the said exemption was being granted in the initial years due to difficulties faced by the exporters in claiming refunds from the government but as the refund mechanism has been streamlined, the government has not extended the exemption on export freight. It is hoped that the government issues a clear cut clarification on this issue in the interests of exporters. 

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