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 11.01.2016

REASONS FOR CONFLICTS BETWEEN CENTRE AND STATES

GST DAILY DOSE OF UPDATION:-
 
REASONS FOR CONFLICTS BETWEEN CENTRE AND STATES:-
 
The implementation of the most awaited GST law is being delayed for mainly two reasons. First is the opposition from the Congress Party regarding three issues, i.e., Abolition of proposal to levy 1% additional tax, incorporation of GST rate in constitution itself and creation of Dispute Resolution Mechanism. Second reason for delayed implementation of GST is the conflicts between Centre and States on certain key issues. The first reason has already been discussed in our earlier update and the second reason is the subject matter of discussion of this update.
 
The first and foremost reason for lack of consensus between the Centre and States was the compensation to be given to the States during the loss of revenue in the initial years of implementation of GST. There has been a huge dispute as regards the compensation to be received by different States as GST is consumption based taxation. As it is known that India comprising of different States out of which some States significantly contribute to the manufacturing activities whereas some states are consuming states. Consequently, manufacturing states will lose significantly during the initial years of implementation of GST. Moreover, the period during which compensation will be given to the States is also a crucial factor for determination as after implementation of GST, the consuming states will earn at higher rate while manufacturing states will lose revenue at higher rate. Consequently, proper equilibrium needs to be maintained. Finally, in order to achieve consensus, it has been proposed to compensate states for a period of 5 years wherein 100% compensation will be for first 3 years, 75% in the fourth year and 50% for the fifth year of implementation of GST. But states still doubt the timely compensation from centre as centre has not given promised CST compensation to states till date.
 
The second reason of dispute for lack of consensus was exclusion of certain items from the purview of GST law for certain specified period of time like Petroleum, High Speed Diesel, Natural Gas, Aviation Turbine Fuel and alcohol for human consumption. It is being demanded from States that only states should have power to levy taxes on these items except in case of imports and inter state trade. The tax from these items is major source of revenue for the states and they do not want to forgo the same.
 
Another reason for conflict between Centre and States was the fixation of threshold limit. While the Centre wants the exemption limit to be Rs. 25 Lakhs, the States are not agreeing for higher threshold limit and support lower threshold limit of Rs. 10 Lakhs. According to the Centre, the contribution of small traders to tax revenue is minimum and insignificant and so the threshold limit should be reasonable keeping into mind the fact that the GST regime will subsume excise duty also which has current threshold limit of Rs. 1.5 Crores. However, with a view to reach consensus with the implementation of GST regime, for the time being it was decided that the threshold limit will be determined by the GST Council.
 
Still another dispute is about the adjudication and appellate authorities to be appointed for the GST. These authorities will come from state or from the centre. While GST has two type of taxes i.e. CGST and SGST and they will be handled by Centre as well as by state. Hence, the field formation of both centre and state will be looking after the same. But smooth implementation of GST require that there should be common adjudication and appellate authorities. But Centre want that these officers should come from centre but the state does not want to lose their power. But to avoid conflict, this matter will be decided later on and centre wants that the constitutional amendment bill is passed at the moment.
 
 
Another dispute is about the rate of tax is to be levied on GST. The states wants it to be higher side so that there is no loss to them. But the centre wants that it should be normal so that it does not add to inflation. They were agreeing around 22% but the opposition congress party want it should not go beyond 18% . This restriction should be placed in constitutional bill itself. But the ruling BJP party does not agree to it. But after the promise of compensation of loss of revenue to states, the state will also agree to the same. But the manufacturing state has demanded additional 1% non cenvatable tax so that there loss is minimum.  The centre is also agreeing to the same but the opposition party is not agreeing the same. The centre wants that the matter will be resolved by GST council.
 
The above reasons for conflicts are sought to be temporarily resolved in order to initiate the process of implementation of GST regime so that a new beginning of unified taxation can be made.

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