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 ON RCM LIABLITY ON SERVICES AVAILED OUTSIDE INDIA

GST UPDATE ON RCM LIABLITY ON SERVICES AVAILED OUTSIDE INDIA
GST UPDATE ON RCM LIABLITY ON SERVICES AVAILED OUTSIDE INDIA

This update is prepared to discuss about the doubtfulness arising in respect of payment of tax under RCM for expenses like commission paid to the commission agent situated abroad, travelling expenses incurred outside India etc. Though the services are provided to the assessee situated in India but all the expenses have been incurred outside India and payment has also been made therein. Before coming to any conclusion, we hereby discuss the relevant provisions in order to arrive at correct conclusion.
Section 2(11) of the IGST Act, 2017 defines import of service which reads as follows:-
‘‘import of services” means the supply of any service, where––
 
(i) the supplier of service is located outside India;
 
(ii) the recipient of service is located in India; and
 
(iii) the place of supply of service is in India;
 
Furthermore, IGST is payable under reverse charge mechanism on services received from person located in non-taxable territory vide serial no. 1 of the Notification No. 10/2017-Integrated Tax  (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 which reads as follows:-
Sl. No. Category of supply of services Supplier of service Recipient of service
1. Any service supplied by any person who is located in a non-taxable territory to any person other than non-taxable online recipient Any person located in non-taxable territory Any person located in the taxable territory other than non-taxable online recipient.
 
Hence in the present case, the place of supply for the services availed by the commission agent is to be determined by provision contained in section 13(8) of the IGST Act, 2017 which reads as follows:-
The place of supply of the following services shall be the location of the supplier of services, namely:––
 
(a) services supplied by a banking company, or a financial institution, or a non-banking financial company, to account holders;
 
(b) intermediary services;
 
(c) services consisting of hiring of means of transport, including yachts but excluding aircrafts and vessels, up to a period of one month.
 
Since the commission agent is covered by the term ‘intermediary services’ as given under section 2 (13) of the IGST Act, 2017, the place of supply in the present case is location of supplier being outside India. This means that the transaction is not covered under the definition of import of services as given above. However, inspite of the fact that the transaction is not covered under the definition of import of service, we shall discuss about the transaction falling under the ambit of section 7(5)(c) of the IGST Act which defines the meaning of ‘inter-state supply’ as follows:-
 
(5) Supply of goods or services or both,––
 
(a) when the supplier is located in India and the place of supply is outsideIndia;
 
(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.
 
Moreover, the phrase ‘supply of goods or services or both in the taxable territory’ is to be determined according to the Place of Supply provisions contained in section 13 whereby section 13(8) would be applied and the services will have to be considered to be provided outside India (being location of service provider). Since the services are not provided in taxable territory, the situation is not covered by section 7(5)(c) and the transaction is not to be considered as Inter State Supply. Hence, no IGST is payable on the said transaction.
It is concluded that there is ambiguity as regards payment of IGST under reverse charge mechanism as discussed above. However, it is pertinent to mention that assessee can avail input tax credit of IGST paid by them under reverse charge mechanism. Hence, it is advisable to assessee to pay the IGST on the said services under reverse charge mechanism and avail the input tax credit of the same to avoid unnecessary dispute in future.
 
The content of this document is solely for informational 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