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

IGST ON ADVANCE RECIEVED FOR EXPORTS

IGST ON ADVANCE RECIEVED FOR EXPORTS

GST DAILY DOSE OF UPDATION
 
IGST ON ADVANCE RECIEVED FOR EXPORTS:-
 
The government has released the revised CGST Act, IGST Act and Formats for various returns to be filed in GST regime. However, harmonious study of the material released by the government is leading to confusions for which there are no solutions. What can one really do is to wait for a suitable clarification from the government. This update seeks to analyse the applicability of IGST on advances received for export of goods/services.
 
Before proceeding to discuss the ambiguity, it is pertinent to refer to section 17 of the Revised IGST Act, 2016 which states that various provisions of CGST Act relating to registration, valuation, time of supply of goods, time of supply of services, input tax credit and utilization thereof, distribution of input tax credit by an Input Service Distributor, job work, accounts and records, payment, tax deduction at source, return, tax collection at source, audit, assessment, adjudication, demands, refunds, interest, recovery of tax, offences and penalties, inspection, search and seizure, prosecution andpower to arrest, appeals, review, advance ruling and compounding shall be applicable for levy of IGST as well. Consequently, we can say that the provisions pertaining to time of supply of goods contained in section 12 shall also be applicable for levy of IGST. Similarly, the provisions pertaining to time of supply of services contained in section 13 shall also be applicable for levy of IGST.
 
The section 12 pertaining to time of supply of goods states that the time of supply of goods shall be earliest of date of issue of invoice by the supplier or the last date of issuing invoice or the date of receipt of payment. Furthermore, the residuary sub-section (5) states that in cases where it is not possible to determine the time of supply under earlier provisions, the time of supply shall be due date of filing return where periodical return is to be filed or date of payment of CGST/SGST in any other case. Similar provisions are contained in section 13 pertaining to time of supply of services. Thus, one may conclude, that in case of export of goods or services, if any advance is received, the date of receipt of advance shall be treated as time of supply.
 
At the same time, it is pertinent to refer the meaning of export of goods given in section 2(5) means taking goods out of India to a place outside India. However, meaning of supply is stated as that defined in section 3 of CGST Act, 2016. Now, in case of exports, for the purpose of levy of IGST, when will the supply be said to have been made will be a matter of dispute. Although, export means taking out of India but there is no clear cut provision for export in the definition of supply. Therefore, in case of advance received for exports, whether IGST will be payable at the time of receipt of advance or not will be a question that is difficult to answer.
 
Simultaneously, if one pursues thedraft return formats, the GSTR-1 serial no. 10 pertains to details of supplies exported including deemed exports but only when invoices have been issued and export has been concluded as the details of shipping bill is to be given. Furthermore, serial no. 10A pertains to amendment to supplies exported including deemed exports in cases of revision of invoice. However, serial no. 11 of the GSTR-1 speaks of tax liability arising on account of time of supply without issuance of invoice in the same period. On perusal of the entries made in serial no. 11, it is found that there is no clarification as regards liability of tax in cases of advances received for exports. Since there is no specific mention of tax liability for advances received against domestic supplies only, it is presumed that even the advances received for exports will have to be captured in GSTR-1. However, this raises doubts as regards liability of payment of IGST in cases where the exports are being done on payment of IGST. Not only this, one may also ponder whether debit is required in the bond if the exports are being made without payment of duty in such cases.
 
Well, if the exporters are made liable to pay IGST even on advances received in lieu of probable exports, they will definitely be at disadvantageous position and it will lead to more compliance.
 
 
Visit us at www.capradeepjain.com and also at
https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/
 

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