Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE ON WHETHER INTEREST INCOME IS A PART OF AGGREGRATE TURNOVER? 72/2020-21

GST UPDATE ON WHETHER INTEREST INCOME IS A PART OF AGGREGRATE TURNOVER? 72/2020-21
AAR rulings on different matters are creating havoc in the life of taxpayers. Many rulings like GST on sale of developed land, taxability of directors renumeration, interest income is a part of aggregate turnover, GST on cross charge etc are an indicator that it is not a wise decision to take the route of rulings for any guidance for proposed or undertaken transactions in business.
Seeing this trend, strong perception in the Trade and Industry is getting build as to why one should even approach the Advance Ruling Authority who is likely to decide the matter against the assessee and when practically there is no appeal mechanism against the said order. You can file appeal before AAAR but the revenue authorities sitting in this appeal forum also confirms the same order. Absence of judicial member at Advance ruling authority is creating this problem. Hence, judicial member should be appointed for meet the end of justice. Furthermore, Court will not accept the writ petition in each case against the order of authority of advance ruling or appellate authority of advance ruling. Hence, it is now clear message for Consultants and tax payers that they should approach advance rulings. On the other hand, if an assesseeopts the route of the adjudication, the doors of the tribunal as well as the courts would always be open to seek relief.
Recently, the AAR Gujarat in case of Shree SawaiManoharlalRathi [Advance Ruling No. GUJ/GAAR/R/2020/10, Dated: 19th May, 2020] has held that the value of exempted income, like interest on PPF, savings bank account and loans given to family/friends, will be included along with taxable supplies while calculating the threshold limit for obtaining GST registration. Under the Goods and Services Tax law, businesses and individuals are required to obtain GST registration if their aggregate turnover is Rs 20 lakh or more if they are engaged in supply of both goods and services.
An individual, not engaged in any business, had filed an application before the Gujarat bench of AAR asking whether interest received from savings bank, PPF and loans and advances to family would be considered for the purpose of calculating threshold limit of Rs 20 lakh for registration under GST law. The individual, in his application, had disclosed that his total receipts in 2018-19 fiscal were about Rs 20.12 lakh, including rent receipt of Rs 9.84 lakh, while the remaining was interest on bank, PPF deposits and from personal loans extended to friends/family.
The AAR, while ruling that interest income would be included for calculating registration threshold, said that the applicant is required to consider the value of both taxable supply i.e. "renting of immovable property" and exempted supply of service provided by way of extending deposits, loans or advances for which he earned interest income, to arrive at "aggregate turnover" to determine the threshold limit for the purpose of obtaining registration under the GST Act.
 
Entry 27(a) of the Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) and Entry 28(a) of the Notification No. 9/2017 -Integrated Tax (Rate) dated: 28.06.2017 relates to the exemption of services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances in so far as the consideration is represented by way of interest. Therefore, such services are exempted from payment of GST and the individual is not required to discharge GST on the activity of providing services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances where the consideration is represented by way of interest.
However, while referring to Section 7 of the CGST Act which defines the scope of supply; it includes sale, transfer, exchange, barter, license, rental, lease and disposal. If a person undertakes either of these transactions during the course or furtherance of business for consideration, it will be covered under the meaning of Supply under GST. When this interest is not related to furtherance of business, hence should not be taken into consideration for aggregate turnover.
This ruling has neglected the fact that applicant is not engaged in any kind of business and moreover, the interest income earned is purely his personal income and not interlinked with any business. PPF deposits, FDs and personal loan interest income cannot be classified as supply made in course of or furtherance of business. Generally, individuals deposit their money in banks or PPF a/cs as a part of investing their hard earned money and cultivating the habit of savings. On the contrary current bank account is opened to run business. It is worthwhile to note that applicant was not involved in any money lending business too. The major problem in this ruling appears is that it has failed to take into consideration the full facts of the case and the provisions of the u/s 7 of the CGST Act, 2017.
Moreover, if we refer the provisions of Income tax, Interest that gets accumulated in our savings bank account must be declared in tax return under income from other sources. Interest from both fixed deposit and recurring deposits is taxable while interest from savings bank account and post office deposits are tax-deductible to a certain extent. But they are shown under income from other sources.
Further, we enjoy a deduction uptoRs 10,000 on interest received from savings account and recurring deposits. While senior citizens get a deduction uptoRs 50,000 on their interest income from fixed deposits.
If the Income Tax provisions clearly classify the interest income in other source head rather than business income head, then GST cannot overrule such provision. In our opinion, the advance ruling decision is erroneous and should not be considered as a final verdict.
AAR is considered as solution provider but to the contrary, it is working exactly opposite of its motive. This ruling will impact a large number of homemakers, retired persons and freelancers forcing them to take GST registration. In the nutshell, the Authority failed to distinguish between earnings made in the individual capacity and in the business capacity. We can only wait for some clarifications from the end of government which can act as a burnolon the wounded and burning issues.
 
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