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: 16 Oct, 2010
Print   |    |  Comment

GST - It must be better late than never!!

 

GST- It must be better late than never!!

Prepared By:

CA Preeti Parihar and

CA Rajani Thanvi

Introduction:-

 

“Continuity gives us roots; change gives us branches, letting us stretch and grow and reach new heights.” How truly it has been said. The change is the need of time, change is innovation, but it becomes arduous when it is not accepted by that people for whom it was made. Whenever any change is about to come in our country it hangs in the way cause of lack of cooperation. To change the system of Indirect taxation Government brought a new system for implementation called GST-The goods and services tax. It was heard that GST will bring a drastic revolution in Indian Indirect Taxation system but the real picture shows something else as it itself become a reason of struggle between Central and states.

 

Need:-

 

Indian entrepreneurs are loaded with a number of taxes. Almost every business transaction suffers a different tax. For services, it is service tax, for manufacture it is Excise Duty, for sale within state it is VAT, for inter-state sale it is CST, for income earned it is Income Tax, for wealth created it is wealth tax, etc. These are mere examples for the consultants, but for the businessmen, they mean a lot of compliances involving a significant number of man power and money. In order to relieve the businessman from some of the taxes, government has planned to bring a composite levy – The GST which is said to bring a tax-revolution in the country. It is said that the GST will simplify the complex tax structure of the country and will replace around 16 central and state taxes including the service tax, excise duty, VAT, etc. while maintaining a collaboration between the Centre and the State.

 

Benefits:-

 

The main beneficiaries will be the business personnel. At present, there are a no. of taxes governed by different Acts and rules. The separate records are to be kept, separate returns are to be filed, different dates are there for payment of taxes and filing of returns, etc. which require a significant amount of man power and money. However, the GST, when implemented, will replace many of the taxes and will obviously reduce the paper work, man power and money. Further, there are no. of ambiguities in certain cases which makes it difficult to ascertain as to which law is applicable. For eg. software and SIM cards are service or goods? The service tax department says it is a service while the sales tax department says it is sale of goods. The GST will resolve the issue. The Government too will be benefitted. It is anticipated that the GDP of the economy will be increased by $500 billion and exports will also increase by 15%.

 

Beginning of GST:-

 

The Thirteenth Finance Commission, as constituted by the President on November 13, 2007 to give recommendations regarding the Central-State Fiscal relations during the year 2010-15. The Commission recommended a model GST structure and also recommended a grant of Rs. 50000 crores for its implementation. The recommendations were accepted in principle and discussions were carried out between the Centre and State.

 

The Empowered committee of state finance ministers has released the First discussion paper on GST on 10.11.2009 and it was proposed that GST is going to be implemented on 01.04.2010 with its new developments regarding unvarying tax rates all over country, removing cascading effects of Cenvat and service tax with set off by making a chain of set-off for hierarchy of Producer/manufacturer/service provider to Retailer/End user level. For this purpose GST is to be introduced at state level. But as history repeats itself Government had faced and still facing intricacy of different opinions of states in the way of implementation of GST. It is not an easy task to combine all the provisions and demands of the states having different thoughts and opinions. When everyone was waiting to greet with GST it was recommended in Report of Task Force on GST that it will be postponed till 01.10.2010 due to oppositions raised by states which is again delayed by 01.04.2011.

 

In the middle:-

 

On oppositions made by states, Government presented a revised draft bill of GST in order to arriving at consensus with the states. In the revised bill Government has provided veto power to the Union Finance Minister relating to state subjects matters on taxation issues. Then after Finance minister had offered some concessions on major demands of states relating to simplification of tax administration and replacement of multiple levies of taxes like CST, VAT, Excise, Service tax into a single tax. Government also proposed dual rate system to be included in GST system but because of this new system states may have revenue loss in initial year of implementation of GST. For this it was cleared by the government for compensation to states for switchover to the new tax regime including special incentives to those states such as Punjab and Haryana for loss out of purchase tax. The Government also agreed to exclude crude oil, petrol, diesel and ATF from the GST structure on demand raised by states.

 

Present scenario:-

 

But as it was predicted this bill also comes in litigations between states and central. The Empowered Committee of State Finance Ministers on GST has rejected the constitutional amendment bill on 01.08.2010. The BJP-ruled states, including Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh and few others had opposed the constitutional amendment saying that all powers of the states have been snatched through the constitutional amendment. Chairman of the Empowered Committee of State Finance Ministers commented on the constitutional amendment that states were against infringement on their financial autonomy and have certain reservation on the provision of draft bill for the GST council and the GST Disputes Authority hence this draft bill is not acceptable in this form to the states. However some states were in favour of this amendment.

 

On coming of oppositions from many states, Centre has given up on the matter of veto powers given to the Union Finance Minister. The veto power has been withdrawn from the constitutional amendment bill on GST with giving a statement that central FM had no any intention of becoming the Super Finance Minister to interfere with the State GST.

 

In the latest meeting of state finance ministers and centre for GST, held on 20.09.2010 many states has accepted the approach of new draft of GST bill except few mainly Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh who still have different viewpoint. In that meeting the Madhya Pradesh government given an idea of an alternative model of the GST and BJP rules states has supported to it. Also some other states have allotted one month time for consideration to make their opinion on revised bill. In the meeting the states has stressed on retention of their rights and wished some more changes in the proposed Act.

 

Next what?

 

Recently, while addressing an interactive session organized by the Merchants' Chamber of Commerce at Kolkata, the chairman of empowered Committee – Mr. Asim Dasgupta, who is also the finance minister of West Bengal; indicated that the ongoing conflicts between the states regarding GST are about to resolve. The matter will be on board once again on October 30, 2010; when the empowered Committee will meet again. The points of dispute – the Dispute settlement mechanism of GST and GST council constitution will be discussed therein.

 

Before Leaving:-

 

Government has to obtain categorical support of all the sates since two-third majority is required for ratification of GST. But some states ruled by BJP and other opposite parties are not happy on implementation of GST. So it becomes a necessity for both Centre and States to have consensus on GST very soon for bringing the GST in actuality in 2011. But after coming of statement of Revenue Secretary in this august that introduction of GST will miss the deadline of April, 2011 it becomes unambiguous that the matter of GST becomes political issue rather than an economical or legal one. It is ever called that “Better late than never” so we can hope that the delay in coming of GST will bring a fruitful result with it’s implication. Let we hope that GST bill will be presented in winter session and political differences will shut down.

 

************

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