Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

UDATE on Issues regarding E-way Bill

UDATE on Issues regarding E-way Bill
This update intends to discuss about the issues arising in case of generation of E-way bill in case of Job Work: -
1.      In case of inter-state movement of goods/capital goods for job work, the value cap of Rs. 50,000/- is not applicable. This is due to third proviso to Section 138(1) of the CGST Act which reads as follows:-
 
Provided also that where goods are sent by a principal located in one State or Union territory to a job worker located in any other State or Union territory, the e-way bill shall be generated either by the principal or the job worker, if registered, irrespective of the value of the consignment:”
 
The same wording is used in GST Rules of Rajasthan Government. Thus, value limit is not applicable in case of movement of goods for job work from one state to another. But the same is not applicable in case of movement of goods within state. Hence, the limit of Rs. 50,000/- is applicable for movement of goods on job work basis within state of Rajasthan.
 
2.      Further, there is no relaxation of distance in Rajasthan as is being done in Gujarat where e-way bill is applicable on movement of goods from one city to another city. Hence, e-way bill is to be generated in state of Rajasthan for every movement of goods in a vehicle. Hence, the job work movement of goods is also not exempted and we have to generate e-way bill of each and every movement of goods. Even the inputs/capital goods moving for repair and maintenance will also require e-way bill if the value of goods exceeds Rs. 50,000/-.  
Such type of repair works are quite frequently takes place in many industries. For example, Stainless steel patta patti industry sends machinery parts such as backup roll, work roll, coupling etc to the job worker on day-to-day basis for the process of grinding. Hence, e-way bill is to be generated for each such movement as the value of such parts is more than Rs. 50,000/-. 

3.      Moreover, e-way bill can be generated by principal or job worker in case of return back of goods by job worker. This has been provided in Rule 138 cited supra. Event the circular number 38/12/2018 dated 26.03.2018 also allows the movement of goods either by principal or job worker. This can be done either by endorsement of job work challan or by issuance of new challan by job worker. However, the e-way portal shows that option of “job work return” in inward transaction type and as soon as the same is entered then the address of registrant comes in “Bill to” column.   

Hence, it implies that the principal has also to generate e-way bill in case of return of job work. Normally, in industry the goods move from one job worker to another job worker. This is most common in textile industry. Goods move to one job worker for bleaching and then it send to another job worker for dyeing and thereafter to another job worker for printing and so on for finishing, washing, felt and packing. In each case, the principal has to generate e-way bill for each onward movement. Thus, it will make the procedure very cumbersome. The difficulty is immense if the principal is situated in another city.

Although the law as well as circular provides for the movement of goods by job worker but the e-way portal provides for job work return by principal only. The other option to job worker in case of return of job work goods generate the challan in other column. This anomaly in e-way portal is creating problems. Hence, in case of job work return, the portal should allow to enter name either in “Bill to” or “Bill from”. It will smoothen the process of e-way bill.
 
4.       Raw materials/Goods/ Machinery parts are sent for processing from one job worker to another job worker in various consignments. The material sent for processing is the intermediate material and have consignment value of more than Rs. 50,000/-. Since there is frequent movement of goods and that too in huge quantities, it is difficult to generate e-way bill for every movement of goods.

Besides, each e-way bill is required to be an adjunct to tax invoice or delivery challan and since the goods sent on job work involves several processes to be undertaken by different job workers, it is extremely complex to create new delivery challan with every movement of goods. In addition, if new delivery challans are issued every time, it will be intricate to keep their track record for the purpose of filing ITC-04. Hence, the requirement of issuance of e-way bill of labour intensive industry like textile and handicraft industry should be dispensed with.

5.      There was also practical difficulty pointed out by industry that movement of cars for repair work will also require e-way bill. Similarly, computer or mobile phone of more than Rs. 50,000/- for repairing will also require e-way bill. Even one scholar asked whether taking out car or mobile phone for official work will also require e-way bill. This seems to be very absurd. But author of this update does not have any answer to the same.

The content of this GST update is for educational purpose only and not intended for solicitation.
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