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

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

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