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 On ITC on vehicle and their services

GST UPDATE On ITC on vehicle and their services
GST UPDATE ON ITC ON VEHICLE AND THEIR SERVICES
Widening the provision but narrowing down the scope
 
Notification No. 02/2019 – Central Tax dated 29.01.2018 has been issued bringing into force the date of applicability from which the CGST (Amendment) Act, 2018 shall come into force. It notifies 1st February 2019 as the date on which the provisions of CGST (Amendment) Act 2018 shall come into effect. This update intends to discuss one of the most important provisions of the said act that is on the admissibility of Input tax credit on motor vehicles and services related to motor vehicles.
 
The earlier provision relating to credit on motor vehicle under Section  17(5) of the CGST Act  read as follows:-
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 16 and subsection (1) of section 18, input tax credit shall not be available in respect of the following,namely:—
 
(a) Motor vehicles and other conveyances except when they are used––
  1. for making the following taxable supplies,namely:—
    1. Further supply of such vehicles or conveyances;or
    2. Transportation of passengers;or
  2. Imparting training on driving, flying, navigating such vehicles or conveyances;
    1. For transportation ofgoods;"
Thus, ITC is not allowed "in respect of" motor vehicles and other conveyances except in specified cases. There was a lot of discussion on the phrase "in respect of" as used in the above clause. Some experts were of view that it has wider impact and covers all the goods and services that are relatable to mot(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 16 and subsection (1) of section 18, input tax credit shall not be available in respect of the following,namely:—
 
(a) Motor vehicles and other conveyances except when they are used––
  1. for making the following taxable supplies,namely:—
    1. Further supply of such vehicles or conveyances;or
    2. Transportation of passengers;or
  2. Imparting training on driving, flying, navigating such vehicles or conveyances;
    1. For transportation ofgoods;"
Thus, ITC was not allowed on motor vehicles except in the circumstances provided therein. Hence, in most of cases, the credit on purchase of new motor vehicle for passengers was not allowed. However, there was dispute on credit of repair and maintenance or insurance of motor vehicle. The words "in respect of" appearing in definition created confusions. There was a lot of discussion on the phrase "in respect of" as used in the above clause. Some experts were of view that it has wider impact and covers all the goods and services that are relatable to motor vehicles. The other school of thought is of the view that this phrase is very restricted and is limited to ITC on the purchase of new motor vehicles. However, the credit on repair and maintenance and insurance of motor vehicle is allowed. The above confusion with regard to availability of credit with regard to insurance and repair & maintenance had been clarified by way of answer given to an FAQ by Government. It was clarified that credit on repair as well as insurance of motor vehicle is allowed.  It is worthwhile to be noted that FAQs have no legal validity. 
 
 
 
However, Section 9 of the CGST (Amendment) Act has substituted clauses (a) of sub section (5) of Section 17 with effect from 1.2.2019 which read as follows:
 
“(a) motor vehicles for transportation of persons having approved seating
capacity of not more than thirteen persons (including the driver), except when
they are used for making the following taxable supplies, namely:—
 
(A) further supply of such motor vehicles; or
(B) transportation of passengers; or
(C) imparting training on driving such motor vehicles;
 
(aa) vessels and aircraft except when they are used––
 
(i) for making the following taxable supplies, namely:—
(A) further supply of such vessels or aircraft; or
(B) transportation of passengers; or
(C) imparting training on navigating such vessels; or
(D) imparting training on flying such aircraft;
 
(ii) for transportation of goods;
 
(ab) services of general insurance, servicing, repair and maintenance in so
far as they relate to motor vehicles, vessels or aircraft referred to in clause (a) or clause (aa).”
 
It is interpreted from the above provision that scope of availing ITC on motor vehicles and on their respective services of insurance, repair and maintenance has been very much narrowed down. Credit can be taken only with respect to those motor vehicles having seating capacity of more than 13 persons including driver. It can further be understood from Clause (ab) enumerated above that services of insurance, repair and maintenance with respect to only those motor vehicles can be taken on those vehicles on which credit is allowed. This has clearly cut down the availment of credit on motor vehicle, repair and insurance of these vehicles only having sitting capacity of more than 13 persons. Normally, trade and industry use motor cars of capacity of 5 to 9 persons. Hence, credit on motor cars as well as credit on repair, maintenance and insurance of such vehicle will not be allowed. Credit in respect of buses will be allowed. However, there is no change for credit on transportation vehicles carrying goods.
  •  
 
The content of this GST update is for educational purpose only and not intended for solicitation.
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