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

Publish Date: 14 Jul, 2014
Print   |    |  Comment

Colors of ambiguity still on Heena

Colors of ambiguity still on Heena

An article by:-

CA. Pradeep Jain
Prayushi Jain
 

There was dispute was going on between the trade and the Central excise department on the exemption on Heena Paste. This exemption was given in last year budget but there was ambiguity in drafting on such notification. We have written an article on the this issue  just after the presentation of the budget. Now the Government has come with the clarification in the next budget. This article tries to analysis this issue.
The history:-
The notification no. 12/2012-CE dated 1.3.2012 exempted the Henna powder not mixed with any other ingredient” by its entry number 134. In next year budget, this entry was amended by notification 12/2013 and heena paste was also exempted. But the entry read as follow:-
 
S. No. Chapter or
heading or
sub-heading or
tariff item of
the First
Schedule
Description
of excisable goods
Rate Condition
No.
66. 33 Henna powder or  paste, not mixed with any other ingredient 8% -
 
Thus the aforesaid entry exempted the Heena paste but the word "not mixed with any other ingredient" also travelled with the Heena paste. It was pointed out by us at that time also that heena paste cannot be made without adding the liquid into the powder. But the department will view it as mixing other ingredient into it. But no clarification was issued by the CBEC at that time.
Later on, the audit wing raised the audit objection on the same lines. The demand of lakhs of Rupees was issued to the manufacturers. Pleading was made that if such interpretation was taken then the benefit of this notification will not extended to any manufacturer. Following the Rule of homogenous construction, the benefit of this notification should be allowed.  However, the department was of stringent in view that there should be no ingredient in the henna paste which at no stretch of imagination was possible.
The post budget era:-
In this budget 2014, a clarification was issued by the department which read as follows:-
 
The clarification given by the budget, 2014 would have given relief to the poor manufacturers of heena paste which finally were exempted of tax if the powder is mixed with any liquid.  But the exclusion of powder mixed with heena dye and any other cosmetics again gave the birth to new dispute era. Revenue shall again allege the assessee those who mix heena dye in the powder or any other cosmetic will not be entitled to claim the exemption. For this purpose, the samples will be taken and will be given to CRCL. Unless and until  the report of the same is received, the manufacturer will not be allowed to clear the goods without payment of duty.
This Henna paste is very cheap selling marketable goods are of strong social values too:-
  • No social function is completed without the application of henna on the hands and feet – whether the function is of engagement, marriage, baby shower, etc.
 
  • When there is birth of any child at home, there is tradition of distributing the henna to all the neighborhood and relatives. This tradition is still alive in many parts of Rajasthan including Jodhpur. 
  • It is considered as a symbol of “akhand saubhagya” in Hindu culture and it is to be essentially applied hands and feet on various fasts like “karva chauth”, “gangaur”, “teej”, etc. It is even required during the pooja in these fasts.
  • It is an essentially to be there in the items of “pooja” of goddesses like laxmi, parvati, etc. In all the temples of these goddesses, henna is an important item which is applied on the hands and legs of statues of these deities, particularly on the festivals. 
  • No hawan/yagya is complete without applying henna.
  • It is applied by Indian girls and ladies on all the occasions and festivals. On the diwali pooja, it is considered customary to sit there with henna on the hands.
The application of henna is not merely limited to hindu culture, rather it is an essential part of muslim festivals like Eid-ul-Fitr and Eid-ul-Azha.
Nobody can afford to add any other dye or any other cosmetic value in such cheaper product.
However, again new round of litigations will start wherein revenue who has always taken up the legal language in the raw form and as it is. Now the department will allege every mixture as made of heena dye or of any of the cosmetic product. Further the cosmetic definition holds its own ambiguity in itself. Every mixture would be sent for testing in laboratories, paras would be raised and representations shall be made. It is the same battle but with dissimilar fuel. Not the least, even the Henna grown in different locations contain certain ingredients from the land itself but the same cannot separated. the department will term it as "other ingredient than liquid. But the manufacturer will say that these are not dye or an ingredient having cosmetic nature.
Winding up:-
Yes the government gave the clarification to the relief of heena manufacturer but with a half hearted approach. Heena is a cheap selling commodity carrying huge social implications as seen above which at no incidence should be brought in the ambit of service tax. The exemptions with if’s & but’s is not justifiable and should be completely be exempted from the tax.
 
 
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