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

UPDATE ON RoDTEP SCHEME EFFECTIVE FROM 01.01.2021

UPDATE ON RoDTEP SCHEME EFFECTIVE FROM 01.01.2021

Recently, Ministry of Finance issued a Press Release dated31.12.2020 wherein it was stated that in order to boost exports, government has decided to extend the benefit of scheme RoDTEP (Remission of Duties and Taxes on Exported Products) to all the export goods w.e.f. 01.01.2021. RoDTEP scheme which is applicable on all export goods is introduced to replace MEIS Scheme which is applicable for export of certain products to specified Countries. The government has resorted to withdrawal of MEIS due to petition filed by US before Dispute Resolution Panel of WTO on the grounds that some of the export benefit schemes designed by India is giving undue advantage to Indian exporters and violate WTO’s Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Agreement. Hence, it is decided by the Indian government to replace the existing schemes with new schemes which are more transparent and compliant to WTO norms.
 
The RoDTEP scheme would refund to exporters the embedded Central, State and local duties/taxes that were so far not being rebated/refunded and were, therefore, placing exports made from India at a disadvantageous position.  The scheme is in conformity with WTO trade norms and best global practises. There are certain taxes/duties/levies that are outside Goods and Services Tax (GST) and are not currently refunded on exports, such as, VAT on fuel used in transportation, Mandi tax, Duty on electricity used during manufacturing, Stamp duty, etc. These taxes would be considered for the benefit under RoDTEP. The rebate shall be claimed as certain percentage of FOB value of exports which is yet to be notified by the government. The rebate would be credited in an exporter’s ledger account with Customs and can be used to pay Basic Customs Duty on imported goods or could be transferred to other importers just like MEIS. An exporter desirous of availing the benefit of the RoDTEP scheme shall be required to declare his intention for each export item in the shipping bill or bill of export. 
 
It is also pertinent to mention that government has also released the Advisory and Procedure to claim the benefit of RoDTEP scheme in the shipping bill wherein in Part I regarding claim in the shipping bill, point no. (e) clearly prohibits the benefit of RoDTEP where benefit of Advance Authorisation, EOU, jobbing etc. has been claimed by the exporter. The relevant paragraph from the Advisory is produced for the sake of convenient reference as follows:-
 
e. There are some checks built in the System to disallow RoDTEP benefit where the benefit of certain other schemes like Advance Authorization, EOU, Jobbing etc. has been availed.While some checks have been built in within the System at the time of filing the Shipping Bill, it is assumed that if the exporter (or the authorized Customs Broker) has submitted the statement as mentioned in para 2(b) with the Shipping Bill, the claim to RoDTEP has been made with the undertaking that no undue benefit would be availed.
 
It is worth mentioning that in case of one of our clients, benefit of RoDTEP was not granted even when shipping bill had mentioned of EPCG license on the grounds that both benefits are not admissible. As of now, the detailed scheme with rate structure is not released but placing such restrictions is not at all understandable. It was mentioned in the Press Release that the RoDTEP scheme is to compensate for taxes such as VAT levied on fuel, electricity duty, mandi tax, stamp duty on documents etc. which are out of GST and are not being refunded to the exporters at present. However, inspite of the fact that the benefit of RoDTEP is to be extended for all export goods, placing such prohibitions that benefit of Advance Authorisation should not have been availed is totally absurd. It is to be mentioned here that RoDTEP scheme seeks to replace MEIS wherein there was no such restriction. The exporters in the past have claimed benefit of MEIS along with Advance Authorisation or MEIS along with EPCG. However, placing this restriction in the upcoming new scheme is not at all understandable. It is hoped that the anomaly is rectified by the government soon otherwise it will tantamount to snatching existing benefits from the exporters in the guise of new scheme. 
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   and u may also follow us on Linkedin  https://www.linkedin.com/in/ca-pradeep-jain-b6a31a16

Post a Comment
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