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 on Client based software valuation on the basis of Maximum Retail Price (MRP) / Retail Sales Price (RSP) 78/2020-21

GST Update on Client based software valuation on the basis of Maximum Retail Price (MRP) / Retail Sales Price (RSP) 78/2020-21

The issue regarding payment of Additional duty of Customs (CVD) on the basis of Maximum Retail Price (MRP) / Retail Sales Price (RSP) or on the CIF value declared by the appellants.
 
The appellant has visited the premises of institutions and understood the software requirement of these institutions. These requirements were told to foreign software developers and they have developed these customized software.  The Appellant imported software tools from foreign suppliers on the basis of customised orders placed by these institutions to meet their specific needs.  The question arose was whether these software shall be considered as packaged software or not and secondly whether the same is liable for assessment on the basis of MRP price or RSP value or not.
 
The Department has started an investigation against the assessee that they have not declared MRP/RSP or correct MRP/RSP on their product. The appellants have allegedly evaded the payment of countervailing duty (CVD) which was leviable on the basis of Maximum Retail Price (MRP) / Retail Sales Price (RSP) as per the provisions of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 which is applicable to the imported goods also for the purpose of levy of countervailing duty (CVD). Department issued show case notice saying that the goods are liable for reassessment on the basis of MRP /RSP for the purpose of levy and assessment of the Additional Duty of Customs (CVD).
 
The appellant have declared transaction value which was arrived by declaring MRP less overhead cost.
 
The Assesses vehemently contested that the provisions of Se4ction 4A of the Central Excise Act relating to Valuation of goods on MRP/RSP are not applicable to the Software imported for institutional buyers. Provisions of Section 4A is applicable only to those goods in relation to which it is required under the Legal Metrology Act or rules made there under to declare the retail sale price on the package and such goods have been specified by the Notification issued under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act.
 
The MRP based assessment in respect of packaged software or canned softwarewas brought into force vide notification No. 49/2008-CE and the abatement allowed was 35%.
 
For the purpose of above notification, "packaged software or canned software" means software developed to meet the needs of variety of users, and which is intended for sale or capable of being sold off the shelf."
 
The Provisions of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act would be applicable to only if the following two conditions are satisfied –
 
(i) Software is developed to meet the needs of variety of users; and
(ii) Software is intended for sale or capable of being sold off the shelf.
 
The appellant submitted that the software imported by them were for use for institutional buyers for their specific use. Hence, it is not to be used by variety of users. Hence, the MRP based valuation is not applicable on the same.
 
The assesses also relies upon the decision of Honble Supreme Court in the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilisers Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner, UOI vs Suksha International and Nuton Gems, Global Sugar Ltd. Vs. CCE, CCE vs JCT Electronics Ltd, and CCE vs. Paradeep Phospate Ltd.
 
Assesses declared that software imported is for the industrial or educational or institutional use which are customized on the basis of order placed by these institutions for specific needs. Such software cannot be treated as packaged software because such software is developed to meet the specific requirements of a particular customer and they cannot be used by other users. Further, such softwares cannot be put to sale off the shelf as the same has been developed for a particular customer/department for specific requirements. Thus, such software shall surely not be covered under ‘packaged softwares’ and cannot be put to assessment based on MRP.
 
But even after reaching to the conclusion, the matter was remanded to adjudication authority to examine individual software that it can be termed as packaged software.
 
Software is always being matter of dispute between department and taxpayer. The dispute revolved around was whether the software is good or service? It was decided that packaged software with no right of amendment is “goods” and customized software with facility of amendment are “services”. Now further dispute arose about their valuation in this matter. If is customized software to be used by institution only then it will not be liable to MRP and hence it will not be chargeable to MRP based valuation. But it has not been considered that it will be classified as “goods” or it will be termed as “service”. 

This is solely for educational purpose.
You can reach us at www.capradeepjain.com, at our facebook page on https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/as well as follow us on twitter at https://www.twitter.com/@capradeepjain21.

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