Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Service tax penalty can’t survive when assessee acted on dept.’s own view of non-taxability: Delhi High Court. *  GST section 74 extended limitation questionable when form 26AS mismatch was already known: Karnataka High Court grants interim relief. *  CGST demand prima facie impermissible after state GST settlement under section 128A: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court asks GSTAT to sympathetically consider delay as taxpayers pursued remedy before wrong forum. *  Supreme Court stays Tripura High Court ruling protecting genuine buyers from ITC denial over supplier’s GST default. *  Diary entries alone can’t prove clandestine removal of goods: CESTAT quashes excise penalty on steel trader. *  Customs could investigate preferential tariff claims even before sec. 28DA: Delhi High Court. *  Customs dept. relied on fake AI generated case laws: supreme court quashes Rs. 425.28 crore penalty. *  No GST exemption in affiliation and annual registration charges for admission or conduct Of examinations: GSTAT. *  Mere invoices, cheque payments insufficient to establish genuine movement of goods: GSTAT restores Rs. 43.44 lakh ITC demand. *  Consolidated GST show cause notice covering multiple financial years is not without jurisdiction: Delhi High Court. *  Construction of independent houses on separate plots not taxable as ‘Residential Complex’ without common facilities: CESTAT. *  GST penalty exceeding statutory maximum unsustainable; Allahabad High Court quashes ? 50,000/- penalty after taxpayer filed return and paid late fee. *  GST order against standard chartered bank passed without hearing set aside by Bombay High Court. *  Retracted statements can’t be relied upon without cross-examination: CESTAT quashes gold confiscation. *  Burden to prove misclassification lies on customs department: CESTAT. *  CESTAT quashes Rs. 98 lakh excise demand on clearance of used refractory brick scrap. *  Service tax demand on irrigation works quashed: Karnataka High Court rules sale of goods component not taxable as service. *  GSTAT restores tax and penalty for transporting iron scrap without E-way bill citing intent to evade tax. *  Madras High Court stays GST recovery from directors without opportunity to show cause under section 89. *  Madras high court stays GST recovery notice against directors; finds prima facie case on applicability of section 79(1)(c). *  Procedural lapses can’t justify harsh punishment without serious customs breach: CESTAT quashes customs broker licence revocation. *  Service tax payable on land leasing and sports complex charges: CESTAT. *  Settled customs dispute can’t be reopened through Article 226 challenge to interest liability: Delhi High Court. *  Mere facilitation of customs clearance can’t establish knowledge of smuggling: Madras High Court. *  GST registration cancellation stayed: Allahabad High Court questions 99% ITC utilisation cap under rule 86B. *  Composition scheme lapses automatically on crossing Rs. 1.5 crore turnover: GSTAT. *  Gujarat High Court quashes GST cancellation orders after officer relied on non-existent AI-generated case laws. *  Importers liable for customs duty benefits availed through manipulated scrips: Delhi High Court. *  Procedural E-way bill lapse alone can’t justify penalty where genuine transaction and absence of tax evasion are established: GSTAT.
Subject News *  Documentary evidence dominates probe, further custody unwarranted: mumbai court grants bail in Rs. 22.44 crore customs duty evasion case. *  Business premises can’t remain sealed for non-participation in GST search: Allahabad High Court. *  GST pre-deposit must be refunded proportionately when taxpayer partly succeeds in appeal: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court grants 30 days to file GST appeal; keeps pre-deposit issue open due to deposit in parallel CGST proceedings. *  GST demand can’t exceed amount proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore order. *  Hundreds-of-crores GST demand and heavy 10% pre-deposit no ground to bypass statutory appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Delhi High Court refuses to entertain challenge to gold confiscation due to statutory appeal remedy and unexplained delay. *  Procedural error in customs broker licence inquiry can be rectified through remand: Delhi High Court. *  GSTR-2A mismatch alone can’t justify ITC denial without invoice-wise verification; personal hearing mandatory: GSTAT. *  GST order passed without uploading personal hearing notices violates sec. 75(4): Allahabad High Court. *  TAX EVASION - Sec. 74 GST SCN quashed for not spelling out fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression: Allahabad High Court. *  STPI’s SOFTEX certification and NoC charges taxable as business support services: CESTAT. *  Suspicion can’t replace proof: CESTAT quashes penalty in alleged gold-smuggling operation. *   Limitation runs from communication of order: Madras High Court upholds rejection of delayed GST Appeals. *  Rajasthan High Court quashes GST demand over unsigned show cause notice. *  ITC recovery upheld where supplier failed to deposit GST: Rajasthan High Court. *  Customs commissioner’s empowered to make port trust liable for duty on pilfered goods: Supreme Court. *  Rectification proceedings can’t be used to challenge an uncontested GST assessment through a writ petition: Andhra Pradesh HC. *  GST proceedings against deceased proprietor unsustainable without notice to legal heir: GSTAT. *  Mere availment of ineligible self-assessed ITC doesn’t amount to suppression without evidence of fraud or wilful misstatement: GSTAT. *  Disposal of mining overburden by entity authorised by mining lease holder constitutes taxable service: CESTAT. *  Toll plaza data not mandatory for ITC refund: GSTAT. *  Disputed GST fraud allegations require investigation: Punjab and Haryana High Court makes interim bail absolute in alleged fraud and GST fraud case. *  Non-manufacturer contractor liable to deposit excess excise duty collected from buyer: CESTAT. *  GST order can’t reject taxpayer’s reply as “not satisfactory” without reasons: Madhya Pradesh High Court. *  Uncorroborated statements can’t establish alleged diversion of duty-free goods: CESTAT. *  Erection services were not liable to service tax prior to 10th september 2004: CESTAT. *  Sec. 74 GST notice must spell out statutory ingredients for invoking extended tax demand proceedings: Allahabad High Court. *  No jurisdictional bar under section 6(2)(b) in parallel CGST SGST proceedings: Delhi High Court refuses to bypass GST appeal remedy. *  Madras High Court remits GST demand for fresh adjudication after taxpayer claims it was unaware of SCN following business closure.  

Comments

Publish Date: 03 Mar, 2012
Print   |    |  Comment

Expectations from Budget 2012

Expectations from Budget 2012

 
Prepared By:
CA Pradeep Jain,
CA Preeti Parihar and
Sukhvinder Kaur LLB[FYIC]

 
The Budget 2012-13 will be announced on March 16, 2012 by the Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee. There are a lot of expectations from Budget as the economy of the country is not yet stable and after effects of recession can still be felt. The European Union economic crisis is also having a negative effect on the Indian economy.
 
Only some major changes effected will bring desired relief to the Trade and Industry. Also, many of the anomalies or shortcomings of existing provisions, if removed will be great help to the harried assessee in complying with them. Our expectations relating to indirect taxes are being enumerated here under:
 
¨     Excise duty on Branded Garments:
 
Central Excise duty was imposed on the Branded garments by the Finance Act, 2011. However, no duty was imposed on the Textile sector. Thus, the duty levied on the Branded garments became non-viable as the Garment industry is purchasing non-excisable material and paying 10.3% duty on their finished goods.
 
The Cenvat credit facility on inputs is not available to them. Also, the levy of duty on branded garments have led to heavy losses as people were less willing to pay more for branded garments. Hence, excise duty imposed on the Garments should be removed.
 
¨     Refund of Difference between Duty Rate on Inputs and finished goods:-
 
In cases where duty on the inputs is 10% but on the finished goods made out of these inputs is half i.e. 5%, this leads to accumulation of Cenvat credit which remains unutilized. In the case of difference between VAT on input and VAT on finished goods, the refund of differential VAT amount is given to the assessee.
 
Similar provision is desired in the Excise also, and the cash payment/refund should be allowed of difference between the excise duty on input and on finished goods.
 
¨     Non-imposition of excise duty on Additional Commodities:-
 
The Government is planning to bring more commodities under Excise net. The Government Revenue Target set up has already been met for this fiscal year.
 
Our suggestion is that additional commodities should not be brought under Excise net as the impact of recession in European market has not reduced. The Government should allow increase of purchasing power of the assessee. The Indian Government should follow the example of Chinese Government which has reduced taxes to increase the purchasing power to their traders/manufacturers.
 
¨     More features on ACES online facility:-
 
The allowing of filing of electronic returns as well as use of registration facilities on ACES website has considerably reduced the physical interaction between the Department and the assessee. However, at grass root level, still a lot is left to be desired.
 
Right now, only Central Excise and service tax returns can only be filed through ACES. This facility should be extended to filing of Annexure-19 (Proof of Export); online intimations etc. This will serve as one more non-monetary incentive for the exporters.
 
¨     AG Audit of Private Assessee’s: –
 
The Auditor General has not been empowered under the Central Excise Act to conduct the audit of Private assessees. Even then AG Audits are being conducted and the assessees are being harassed as a lot of time, money and resources are utilized for the same.
 
AG Audit of private assessee’s should not be allowed. A specific and clear provision should be enacted in this regard.
 
¨     Increase in Threshold Limit of Service Tax:-
 
At present, under service tax, threshold limit of Rs. 10 lakhs in a year is allowed to the service provider, whereas to a manufacturer, the SSI exemption allowed is of 1.5 crores. And whereas, nearly 57% of India GDP comes from service sector and is still increasing. Looking to the increasing scope of service sector, the threshold limit should be increased and should be brought at par with the SSI exemption under Excise.
 
Another issue for which clarification should be issued is that whether the threshold exemption is available after claiming abatement or before claiming abatement. This clarification will prevent a lot of litigation on this issue.
 
¨     Threshold Exemption in line with Point of Taxation Rules, 2011:-
 
The Point of Taxation Rules, 2011 have introduced payment of service tax on accrual basis instead of receipt basis. However, the Threshold exemption is still being granted on billed basis. It is being expected that the threshold exemption will be granted on the same lines as the Point of Taxation rules i.e. on accrual basis. However, if this is done, its significance will reduce. The service sector is mostly subject to the negotiations. It is a matter of fact that the realizations are on the lower side while billing is always of higher amount. Further, the realization is also slow as compared to business. If the threshold exemption is also aligned to Point of Taxation rules, 2011, i.e. it is counted on the accrual basis, more no. of people will come under the service tax net, though their receipts are not so. For eg. a person raises the following bills and corresponding receipts as follows:-
 

 

Financial year Billed Amount Receipts
2011-12 11 lacs 9.5 lacs
2012-13 12 lacs 11 lacs
2013-14 10.5 lacs 9 lacs

 
Thus, if the billing is taken as the basis, the above person will not get the benefit of threshold exemption in any of the three subsequent years. On the other hand, if it is kept on receipt basis only, he will get the benefit of this notification in two years.
 
Further, the peoples’ attitude towards service sector is still required to be matured and mostly the bills so raised are subject to huge discounts. Thus, keeping the accrual basis for threshold exemption will reduce its significance. This is also a major factor which is to be considered while deciding the issue.
 
¨     Abatement vis-à-vis Cenvat Credit:-
 
For claiming abatement under Notification No. 01/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006, the condition imposed is that Cenvat credit cannot be availed or exemption under Notification No. 12/2003-ST. This has been done to avoid imposing service tax on cost materials or goods used during the course of providing service.
 
However, there is no need to deny the Cenvat credit of input services utilized in providing the service under abatement scheme. The reason behind this is that in such cases, the service provider is not able to take the Cenvat Credit of input services due to which their cost increases. The input service component gets included in their cost/assessable value. Hence, service tax is again levied on the input service tax component.
 
¨     Raising of Demands for Older period at 10.3%:-
 
For older periods, the demand should be raised at the rate of 10.3% instead of 10% cenvat, 2% education cess and 1% she cess. The department should bifurcate the tax into excise duty and cesses instead of the assessee being harassed for the same.
 
¨     Increase in SSI Exemption:-
 
SSI Exemption is granted under Notification No. 08/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003. At present exemption of Rs. 1.5 Crores is granted if home consumption of assessee in the previous financial year is less than Rs. 4 Crores. The time is correct for increase the small scale exemption as the cost of inputs, capital goods have gone up.
 
The World Bank has also recommended that SSI exemption is required to be increased to 6-7 Crores. It is submitted that the plant & machinery of Rs. 3 crores should be allowed to be retained by the SSI unit. Almost all of the Industry as well as Trade Associations are demanding increase in SSI exemption.
 
¨     Proposed Negative list of Services: Exemption and Abatement issues: -
 
While presenting the Union budget, 2011; the Finance Minister proposed to bring drastic changes in the service tax through next budget. Right now, the service tax is levied on specified services which are well defined and exemptions thereon are also specified. However, it is proposed to bring a negative list of services which implies that other than the services mentioned in the said list, all the other services will be subject to service tax. A draft paper has already been issued for public debate.
 
As negative list of services is being proposed to be introduced, a detailed and thorough homework is required to be done before the same becomes a reality. At present, since there are specified no. of services, their classification has made the levy and collection of taxes easier. Further, when exemption and abatement rate is to be specified, the classification plays an important role.
 
The issue of Abatement allowed in the services and exemption from services tax granted to the services are required to be addressed properly. At present, the service which is taxable is defined and then exemptions created therein are specified. For instance, Goods Transport by Road service is taxable service however exemption is granted in case the case the consignment being sent is less than Rs. 1, 500/- or in case of individual case, the consignment is less than Rs. 750/-. However, under the negative list of services, there will be no taxable service of GTA defined as the category of services will not be in existence, then how the exemption under the negative list will be available. Similarly, abatement of 75% is allowed in GTA service, if the category of service will not be there then how the abatement will be granted.
 
Further, while giving the exemptions, the practice is to mention the category of services. For eg. - service tax refund as allowed under notification no. 17/2009-ST dated 7.7.2009, simply list of categories have been given and it is written that if these are used for export, service tax refund will be allowed on them. Further, only 2-3 conditions are mentioned in front of each classification subject to which the refund will be granted. However, in case of negative list, the no. of conditions will more, as the type of services included therein will have to be defined there only. In other words, the exemption notifications will be more elaborative and detailed one.
 
Thus, government is trying to bring almost all the services in the service tax net by one attempt only rather than including 4-5 services every year. However, in the proposed system, there will be only a negative list and all other services will be taxable provided they fall in the definition of “Service”. In such a case, how the levy and collection will be affected, is going to be a challenge for government. Thus, a thorough study of every aspect is required, before the implementation of Negative list of services is introduced.
 
 
¨     Payment of service tax on import of service from Cenvat Account: -
 
From last few years, payment of service tax from Cenvat in case of reverse charge method has been on fire. The government amended the definition of output service and excluded the GTA service therefrom, which settled the issue in respect of GTA service. However, no such amendment has been made for other such services which are covered under reverse charge method. A number of decisions have been given in favour as well as in against of it. Even the high court has decided in favour of assessee that the service tax in case of import of service can be paid from Cenvat Credit. But department is still not accepting the same.
 
This controversy can be met only by making relevant amendment in the statutory provisions. Thus, government should specifically prescribe that the service tax in such cases can be paid from the Cenvat Credit where the Cenvat credit has been rightfully availed by an assessee.
 
Winding up:-
 
These are only some of the expected changes, expectations of the people and suggestions thereupon regarding the Budget 2012. As usual everyone has an eagle’s watch on the upcoming budget and hoping that it will bring the simplicity in tax structure.
 

*********

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