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 REQUIREMENT OF REGISTRATION ON LIAISON OFFICE153/2020-21

GST UPDATE ON REQUIREMENT OF REGISTRATION ON LIAISON OFFICE153/2020-21
There have been contradictory decisions by various Advance Rulings of different states even on settled issues like GST under RCM on director’s remuneration, GST on supply of goods without entering the Indian Territory etc. In this update, we shall be discussing another issue which is again debated between professionals about taking registration by a Liaison office in India of a company incorporated outside India in the case of M/s Fraunhofer- Gessellschaft Zur Forderung der angewwandten Forschung.
The applicant, incorporated in Germany, undertakes the business of promoting applied research and hence established their liaison office in Bangalore, India, under the permission of RBI, to act as an extended arm of the head office and to carry out the activities that are permitted. In view of this, the applicant sought a ruling in respect of the following questions:
i. Whether the Activities of liaison office amount to supply of services?
ii. Whether a liaison office is required to be registered under the CGST Act, 2017?
iii. Whether the liaison office is liable to pay GST?
The applicant submitted that they had followed the conditions stipulated by RBI which are as follows
(i) The liaison office shall be established within six months from the date of the permission letter.
(ii) The liaison office will not generate income in India and will not engage in any trade / commercial activity   and undertake only permissible activities as mentioned in Schedule II of FEMA Notification No. 22/2000-RB dated May 3, 2000, as amended from time to time.
(iii) It should restrict its activities to those given in Para 4 (iii) (a) of Form FNC submitted by the Applicant.
(iv) It will function as per the conditions mentioned in the Annexure-1 of RBI approval letter.
(v) It will represent only the applicant company and approach RBI for prior approval if it wants to represent any group company.
Further Annexure-I of the RBI permission letter provided the terms and conditions according to which the liaison office in India will perform the following functions.-
a. Representing in India the parent company.
b. Promoting export/import from/to India.
c. Promoting technical/Financial collaborations between parent/group companies and companies in India.
d. Acting as a communication channel between the parent Company and Indian Companies.
Moreover the applicant stated that for any transaction to be taxed under section 9 of CGST Act, 2017, it should be covered under the scope of Supply as per section 7 of CGST Act 2017.
 
As the activities undertaken by the applicant are approved by RBI and does not cover under business transaction so it shall not fall under Section 7(1)(a) of CGST Act 2017. Further the applicant has stated two favourable decisions given in the case of the following wherein it was held that Liaison office is not required to get registered:-
  1. Takko Holding GMBH 2018 (19) GSTL 692 (AAR GST)
  2. Habufa Meubelen BV 2018 (14) GSTL 596 (AAR GST)
AAR discussed the definition of “Liaison Office” which is defined under the Foreign Exchange Management (Establishment in India of a branch office or a liaison office or a project office or any other place of business) Regulations, 2016 which is reproduced here for quick reference
“Liaison Office means a place of business to act as a channel of communication between the principal place of business or head office or by whatever name called and entities in India but which does not undertake any commercial/trading/ industrial activity, directly or indirectly and maintains itself out of inward remittances received from abroad through normal banking channel.”
AAR held that liaison activity of the applicant actually falls under clause (b) of Section 2 (17) of CGST Act, 2017 as it is ancillary to the activities mentioned in clause (a) of Section 2 (17) of CGST Act, 2017. Further, it is to be noted that the definition of business for the purpose of GST is derived from its definition in the Act and RBI's injunction on business for the applicant can't decide the scope of business for the purpose of GST. So the applicant is involved in the business. So the AAR has concluded as follows
  1. The liaison activities being undertaken by the applicant (LO) in line with the conditions specified by RBI amount to supply under Section 7(1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017.
 
  1. The applicant (LO) is required to be registered under the CGST Act, 2017.
 
  1. The applicant (LO) is liable to pay GST if the place of supply of services is in India.
 
There are been similar opinion of experts even in the case of Income tax that transactions performed by liaison office is not subject to tax. Again it has created ambiguity on this issue and trade and industry will demand a clarification from Board. It has been seen in past also that CBIC has come with clarification against the verdict given by AAR. Else, the matter will go to High Court.
It has been felt that there should central authority of Advance Rulings rather than statewise Advance Rulings.  These state level AARs are giving contradictory decisions and thus leading confusion in trade and industry. There is great difficulty in continuing the business in different states and running contrary to main objective of GST of “One tax, one nation”.
Secondly, it is felt that there is a urgent need of judicial members in AAR so that unbiased decisions are pronounced by them. Even this will also help the revenue by reducing litigation rather than increasing disputes by following pro-revenue approach.  
Lastly, the controversial decisions by state level AARs have given the feeling in minds of trade as well as consultants that it is dangerous to seek Advance Ruling on any issue because they will unsettle even the settled issues. Even the authors of this article believe that the same feeling is now prevailing even at the level of CBIC as well as GST council also.
 
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/@capradeepjain21and u may also follow us on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/ca-pradeep-jain-b6a31a16
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