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: 02 Mar, 2013
Print   |    |  Comment

Critical reasoning of Notification no. 03/2013 ST dated 01.03.2013


An article by:-
 
CA. Pradeep Jain
CA. Preeti Parihar
CA. Shubham Sancheti
 
Introduction:-
In previous budget, service tax law was shifted to negative list regime. Mega exemption notification no. 25/2012-ST dated 20.6.2012 was issued to prescribe the list of exempted services. In the current year budget, nominal changes have been done in this list. One such change has been done in the serial no. 21 of this notification which exempts certain services provided by a Goods transport agency. This article has tried to look into the implications of this amendment.
Previous Provisions:
As per the previous provision as contained in serial no. 21 of mega exemption notification, the transport of following goods by Goods transport agency was exempted:-
(a)  fruits, vegetables, eggs, milk, food grains or pulses in a goods carriage;
(b)  goods where gross amount charged for the transportation of goods on a consignment transported in a single goods carriage does not exceed one thousand five hundred rupees; or
(c)   goods, where gross amount charged for transportation of all such goods for a single consignee in the goods carriage does not exceed rupees seven hundred fifty;
Amended Provision:
Union budget, 2013 has issued Notification no. 03/2013-ST dated 1.3.2013 to amend the above notification. The amended provision under serial no. 21 reads as follows:-
21. Services provided by a goods transport agency, by way of transport in a goods carriage of,-
(a) agricultural produce;
(b) goods, where gross amount charged for the transportation of goods on a consignment transported in a single carriage does not exceed one thousand five hundred rupees;
(c) goods, where gross amount charged for transportation of all such goods for a single consignee does not exceed rupees seven hundred fifty;
(d) foodstuff including flours, tea, coffee, jaggery, sugar, milk products, salt and edible oil, excluding alcoholic beverages;
(e) chemical fertilizer and oilcakes;
(f) newspaper or magazines registered with the Registrar of Newspapers;
(g) relief materials meant for victims of natural or man-made disasters, calamities, accidents or mishap; or
(h) defense or military equipments;”;
These above services by GTA in relation to transportation of the specified goods shall be exempted.
Analysis of amendment:-
·        The new exemptions added to material listed in serial no. (e) to (h) viz, chemical fertilizers, newspaper-magazines, relief materials, defense equipments, etc. were already there in this notification if these products were transported through rail or vessel. Now, budget, 2013 has also extended the exemption if these materials are transported through road by a goods transport agency. This has been done to ensure the uniformity in exemption in case of same material whether it is transported by road, or by rail or by vessel.
·        The exemption contained in serial no. (b) and (c) as pertaining to the limit of Rs. 750/- and Rs. 1500/- are kept intact.
·        The agricultural produces have been added to this list. The term“agriculture produce” has been defined in section 65B of the Finance Act which reads as follows:-
(5) "agricultural produce" means any produce of agriculture on which either no further processing is done or such processing is done as is usually done by a cultivator or producer which does not alter its essential characteristics but makes it marketable for primary market;
Thus, as per above definition, any produce of agriculture on which minimum processing is done by cultivator which does not alter its essential characteristics but makes it marketable for the primary market.
·        In place of the previous entry consisting of “fruits, vegetables, eggs, milk, food grains or pulses”, a new entry consisting of “foodstuff including flours, tea, coffee, jaggery, sugar, milk products, salt and edible oil, excluding alcoholic beverages” have been inserted. The fruits, vegetables, eggs as contained in previous entry will remain included in the term foodstuff. Food grains and pulses as stood previously under this entry will now be included in the term “agricultural produces”.
 
Some probable points of dispute:-
The new entry related to the foodstuffs is going to be the centre of dispute in this amendment. The foodstuffs include the “flours”. However, a question arises whether the flours that are not directly eatable like guar flour will also be included and exemption will be allowed? The answer lies in the analysis of the term “food stuff” which is defined as follows:-
·        As per Collinsdictionery.com – “Any material, substance, etc, that can be used as food”
·        As per wordwebonline.com – “consumer goods sold by a grocer” or “a substance that can be used or prepared for use as food.
Thus, as per above definitions, the food stuff is any item that can be used or prepared for use as food. The exemption includes the flours, thus any type of flour which can be prepared for use as food will be included herein. However, some of the interesting uses of the guar flour/ guar gum powder are that it is used in the processed cheese, in bakery, in soups, in noodles and also in preparation of beverages. On the other hand, it is also used for industrial purposes like in chemical industry, paper industry, cosmetics, etc. Similar is the case with salt. Besides a foodstuff, it is also used in the aluminium purification, caustic/chlorine manufacture, pottery production, soap and glycerine manufacture, etc. The divergent uses of the products are definite indicators of probable litigation as the department will deny the exemption by saying that it is not a foodstuff, rather it is used for industrial purpose. Also, it will not be possible to correlate the item always with its end use in order to claim the exemption. Thus, some sort of clarification is required on this aspect.
Further, there was no need of adding the tea, coffee and jaggery as these were already included in the definition of “agricultural produces”. This fact is already clarified in the education guide dated 20.6.2012. These clarifications say that plantation crops like rubber, tea or coffee will be covered in the definition of agricultural produce. Further as per explanation given in para 4.4.7 of education guide, cereals, pulses, copra and jaggery will also be covered in the definition of agricultural produce. However, jaggery, tea and coffee have been covered in the new entry of food stuff.
 
While parting:-
Despite the ambiguities referred hereabove, the additions made in the list of goods to be transported by GTA will always be appreciated. There was discrimination previously in respect of the same goods when transported by rail/vessel and when the same are transported by road.  It is good on part of government who has taken steps to bridge this gap by amending the mega exemption notification.

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