Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update on Kar AAR on Director's Remuneration #37/2020

GST Update on Kar AAR on Director's Remuneration #37/2020
The havoc created by the advance ruling pronounced by the Rajasthan AAR in the case of M/s Clay Crafts India Pvt. Ltd. is the most vibrant topics for discussion amongst the companies as it ruled that GST is liable to be paid by the companies even on remuneration paid to its directors under reverse charge mechanism contending that directors are not employees of the company. The AAR while pronouncing adverse decision had also not considered various other facts such as TDS deducted under section 192 of Income Tax Act, directors reporting such remuneration under “Income from salary” and other provisions such as EPF, ESI. Although, this is not the first time wherein pro-revenue opinion has been affirmed by the Advance Ruling but the decision created much hype. However, within a short span of time, the Advance Ruling Authority of Karnataka pronounced a contrary ruling in the case of M/s ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL [2020-VIL-118-AAR]. The conclusion arrived at in the decision of M/s ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL is the subject matter of discussion of the present update.  
Although the ruling did not pronounce detailed ruling on the applicability of GST on remuneration paid to directors but the decision given indicates favourable opinion for the assessees on the said issue. The applicant, M/s ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL sought AAR in respect to the following questions:-

i) Whether various incomes such as partner’s salary, salary in the capacity of director, interest on various deposits, rent received for commercial and residential property, capital gain/loss on sale of shares shall be considered for Aggregate Turnover for the purpose of registration under GST?

ii)Out of given nature of income / revenue, when the supply, even if exempted, need to be considered?

Out of the many sources of income pointed out, our discussion would be restricted to inclusion of “Salary received as Director from Private Limited company”in the aggregate turnover for the purpose of registration requirement of the applicant.
The Authority has stated that there are two possibilities with the amount received by the applicant as Director which are as follows:-
  1. Amount received as Executive Director: The AAR has pronounced that Services provided as Executive Director by the applicant are as an employee to the employer and not to be treated as supply of services as per Schedule III of CGST Act 2017. Hence, such amount would not form part of aggregate turnover for the purpose of determining liability to get registration under GST.
  2. Amount received as Non-Executive Director: The applicant is a nominated director and the services provided in the nature of Non-Executive director is liable to tax under RCM in the hands of the company. This has been pronounced on the basis of the entry No. 6 of Notification No. 13/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017. Hence, it will be included in the aggregate turnover for determining liability to get registration under GST.
Therefore, the AAR distinguished the liability to pay GST on the remuneration paid to the directors on the criteria of director being executive/non-executive. However, one important point to be noted is that the AAR has affirmed that the executive directors engaged in managing day to day affairs of the company are employees and are covered by entry no. 1 of the Schedule III to the CGST Act, 2017
Now, the question arises is that what course of action is expected from the assessees. It is very much clear that the advance ruling is binding only on the applicant and the jurisdictional officer and has only persuasive value for other assessees. Nonetheless, it is a matter of discussion as the Authority for Advance Ruling of two different states have pronounced two different rulings on the same matter. The National Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling for deciding on conflicting rulings pronounced by AARs has not been constituted till date and is not operational. Consequently, such contrary rulings are adding to confusion amongst the taxpayers and it is hoped that clarification in this regard is issued soon so that unwarranted dispute may be put to rest.
 
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