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

Publish Date: 27 Feb, 2010
Print   |    |  Comment

Capitalisation on Capital Goods

 

Capitaliation on Capital Goods

 

Prepared By:

CA Pradeep Jain

Mayank Palgauta

 

The recent budget has made changes in respect of reversal of Cenvat credit on removal of capital goods. Through this piece, we are trying to analysis the same and seeing its impacts.

 

Amendment in the Budget:-

 

The second proviso to sub-rule 5 of Rule 3 has been substituted which reads as follows:-

 

 “Provided further that if the capital goods, on which CENVAT Credit has been taken, are removed after being used, the manufacturer or provider of output services shall pay an amount equal to the CENVAT Credit taken on the said capital goods reduced by the percentage points calculated by straight line method (SLM) as specified below for each quarter of a year or part thereof from the date of taking the CENVAT Credit, namely:-

 

1.      for computers and computer peripherals:

 

for each quarter in the first year @ 10%

for each quarter in the second year @ 8%

for each quarter in the third year @5%

for each quarter in the fourth and fifth year @1%

 

2.      for capital goods, other than computers and computer peripherals @ 2.5% for each quarter.”

 

Meaning:

 

From the above amendment in Rule 3 (5) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 it is clarified that those Capital Goods on which credit is taken and are removed after being used by the Manufacturer or service provider then he will liable to pay the proportionate amount of Cenvat Credit which will be decreased by depreciation amount calculated on % basis on each quarter in each year or part thereof. Earlier the depreciation was provided @ 2.5% per quarter. But now the Capital goods have been classified in two categories for this purpose -

 

                               I.            computers and computer peripherals; and

                            II.            other capital goods

 

In first category of “computers and computer peripherals” the amount of depreciation will be determined as follows:

 

 

% apply in each quarter

Total historical cost of capital goods will reduced by

In first Year

10 %

10 * 4 =     40%

In second Year

8 %

 8 * 4 =       32%

In third Year

5 %

 5 * 4 =       20%

In fourth Year

1 %

 1 * 4 =         4%

In fifth Year

1 %

 1 * 4 =         4%

TOTAL % of depreciation

                  100%

 

Thus, the assessee will able to get the full amount of depreciation during the first five year due to affect of SLM approach.

 

For Capital Goods, other than computers and computer peripherals, the benefit of depreciation will be permitted during the period of ten years as rate of depreciation is given in this notification @ 2.5 % per quarter.

 

Whereas according to provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the amount of depreciation on "Computers and Office Equipments” will be calculated on the basis of Written down Value (WDV) method @ 60 % on carrying amount of such asset in each year and part thereof. This can be understood by the following table: -

 

 

PARTICULARS

CALCULATIONS OF DEPRECIATION AMOUNT

CARRYING AMOUNT

 

Assumed Cost of Asset

Rs. 100

First Year

100 * 60 % = Rs. 60

(100-60) = Rs. 40

Second Year

40 * 60% = Rs. 24

(40-24) = Rs. 16

Third Year

16 * 60% = Rs. 9.6

(16-9.6) = Rs. 6.4

Fourth Year

6.4 * 60% = Rs. 3.84

(6.4-3.84) = Rs. 2.56

Fifth Year

2.56 * 60% = Rs. 1.54

(2.56-1.54)= Rs. 1.02

 

Thus, according to Income Tax Act, 1961 the assessee will not be able to get full amount of depreciation on such asset due to affect of WDV approach during first five years.

 

But while going through per year benefit of depreciation in terms of % as a whole then it appears that benefit of depreciation amount in first year will be more under Income Tax Act whereas in subsequent years benefit will be more under Excise Law. This can be presented in tabular form as follows: -

 

 

Particulars

As per Excise Law

As per Income Tax Law

Excess Benefit under excise law

 

Benefit of depreciation in % on Original Cost

 

First Year

40 %

60 %

(-) 20 %

Second Year

32 %

24 %

8 %

Third Year

20 %

9.6 %

10.4 %

Fourth Year

4 %

3.84 %

0.16 %

Fifth Year

4 %

1.54 %

2.46 %

TOTAL

100 %

98.98 %

 

 

There should not be different tax rates under Income tax and Central Excise Rules.

 

The second impact of this amendment clarifies is that the depreciation will be allowed on straight line method. Earlier it was not clearly provided in the rule that the depreciation will be allowed on straight line or written down value method. The audit party has raised paras on the same. But this dispute is settled by this clear amendment. This is a welcome step.

 

Before parting……..

 

The cenvat credit on the capital goods falling under Chapter 82, 84, 85, 90 is allowed as per Rule 2(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The computer falls under the above definition. But the other condition is that the same should be used in the factory but does not include the things used in office premises. Most of the computers and peripherals are used in the office premises only. As such the credit will not be allowed on the same. However, the computers and computer peripherals are attached to machines comes along with machine and classified as a whole in that tariff heading. If this part is removed after use then the same will fall under tariff heading of machine. As such, whether the depreciation listed above will be allowed? The department will not agree to the same. But the service provider will definitely get the benefit of the same.

 

***********

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