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: 03 Mar, 2016
Print   |    |  Comment

INPUT SERVICE DISTRIBUTOR –CONCEPT SIMPLIFIED & SCOPE WIDENED

INPUT SERVICE DISTRIBUTOR –CONCEPT SIMPLIFIED & SCOPE WIDENED

An article by
                                                            CA Pradeep Jain
CA Preeti Parihar
CA Vaibhav Bothra

 
Introduction:-
 
Budget 2016 has been introduced and it has bought some major changes in the Cenvat credit scheme by amending the Cenvat Credit rules, 2004. One such change has been introduced in the rule 7 which relates to the input service distributer. With a view to improve credit flows between different manufacturing / service locations, Rule 7 dealing with distribution of credit on input services by an Input Service Distributor is being completely rewritten by way of substitution of the existing Rule 7 of the CCR. Also, a new rule 7B has been inserted providing the distribution of credit by warehouse. This article is an insight on the amendments so made w.e.f. 1.4.2016.
 
Existing rule 7 of CCR:-
 
The existing language of rule 7 of CCR reads as follows:
"7. Manner of distribution of credit by input service distributor. – The input service distributor may distribute the CENVAT credit in respect of the service tax paid on the input service to its manufacturing units or units providing output service, subject to the following conditions, namely:-
++ The credit distributed against a document referred to in rule 9 does not exceed the amount of service tax paid thereon;
++ Credit of service tax attributable to service used by one or more units exclusively engaged in manufacture of exempted goods or providing of exempted services shall not be distributed;
++   Credit of service tax attributable to service used wholly by a unit shall be distributed only to that unit; and
++ Credit of service tax attributable to service used in more than one unit shall be distributed pro-rata on the basis of the turnover of such units during the relevant period  to the total turnover of all its units which are operational in the current year, during the said relevant period.
Explanation 1. - For the purposes of this rule, “unit” includes the premises of a provider of output service and the premises of a manufacturer including the factory, whether registered or otherwise.
Explanation 2. - For the purposes of this rule, the total turnover shall be determined in the same manner as determined under rule 5.”
Explanation 3. – for the purpose of this rule, the ‘relevant period’ shall be-
(a)If the assessee has turnover in the ‘financial year’ preceding to the year during which credit is to be distributed for month or quarter, as the case may be, the said financial year; or
(b)If the assessee does not have turnover for some or all the units in the preceding financial year, the last quarter for which details of turnover of all the units are available, previous to the month of quarter for which credit is to be distributed.
The computation of “total turnover” is laid down in the new rule 5 which too has been substituted by the captioned notification 18/2012-CE(NT) and the same is defined thus –
(E) “Total Turnover” means sum total of the value of –
(a) All excisable goods cleared during the relevant period including exempted goods, dutiable goods and excisable goods exported;
(b) Export turnover of services determined in terms of clause (D) of sub-rule (1) above and the value of all other services, during the relevant period; and
(c)  All inputs removed as such under sub-rule (5) of rule 3 against an invoice, during the period for which the claim is filed.”
This rule is applicable as on the date and will continue to be applicable till 31.3.2016.
 
Amended rule 7 as applicable from 1.4.2016:-
The new rule 7 as amended by the notification no. 13/2016-CE(NT) dated 01/03/2016 which is applicable w.e.f. 1.4.2016 is as follows:
―7. Manner of distribution of credit by input service distributor.-The input service distributor shall distribute the CENVAT credit in respect of the service tax paid on the input service to its manufacturing units or unit providing output service or an outsourced manufacturing units, as defined in Explanation 4, subject to the following conditions, namely :—
(a) the credit distributed against a document referred to in rule 9 does not exceed the amount of service tax paid thereon;
(b) the credit of service tax attributable as input service to a particular unit shall be distributed only to that unit;
(c) the credit of service tax attributable as input service to more than one unit but not to all the units shall be distributed only amongst such units to which the input service is attributable and such distribution shall be pro rata on the basis of the turnover of such units, during the relevant period, to the total turnover of all such units to which such input service is attributable and which are operational in the current year, during the said relevant period;
(d) the credit of service tax attributable as input service to all the units shall be distributed to all the units pro rata on the basis of the turnover of such units during the relevant period to the total turnover of all the units, which are operational in the current year, during the said relevant period;
(e) outsourced manufacturing unit shall maintain separate account for input service credit received from each of the input service distributors and shall use it only for payment of duty on goods manufactured for the input service distributor concerned;
(f) credit of service tax paid on input services, available with the input service distributor, as on the 31st of March, 2016, shall not be transferred to any outsourced manufacturing unit and such credit shall be distributed amongst the units excluding the outsourced manufacturing units.
Explanation.-The provision of this clause shall, mutatis-mutandis, apply to any outsourced manufacturer commencing production of goods on or after the 1st of April, 2016;
(g) provisions of rule 6 shall apply to the units manufacturing goods or provider of output service and shall not apply to the input service distributor.
Explanation 1.- For the purposes of this rule, ―unitincludes thepremises of a provider of output service or the premises of a manufacturer including the factory, whether registered or otherwise or the premises of an outsourced manufacturing unit.
Explanation 2.–For the purposes of this rule, the total turnover shall be determined in the same manner as determined under rule 5:
Provided that the turnover of an outsourced manufacturing unit shall be the turnover of goods manufactured by such outsourced manufacturing unit for the input service distributor.
Explanation 3.– For the purposes of this rule, the relevant period‘ shall be, -
(a) if the assessee has turnover in the financial year‘ preceding to the year during which credit is to be distributed for month or quarter, as the case maybe, the said financial year; or;
(b) if the assessee does not have turn over for some or all the units in the preceding financial year, the last quarter for which details of turnover of all the units are available, previous to the month or quarter for which credit is to be distributed.
Explanation 4.– For the purposes of this rule, ―outsourced manufacturing unitmeans a job-worker who is liable to pay duty onthe value determined under rule 10A of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 on the goods manufactured for the input service distributor or a manufacturer who manufactures goods, for the input service distributor under a contract, bearing the brand name of such input service distributor and is liable to pay duty on the value determined under section 4A of the Excise Act.
 
Analysis of amendment:-
 
The new rule 7 is analyzed as follows:-
 
·        The main amendment brought by the new rule is allowing the distribution of credit by Input Service Distributor to outsourced manufacturing units. It is interesting to note that The Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of Sunbell Alloys Co. Of India Ltd. vs. CCE, BELAPUR [2014 (34) STR 597 (Tri. - Mumbai)] denied the availment of CENVAT Credit by a jobber against theISD invoice issued by the principal manufacturer. Theamendment has the effect of overcoming the impact of thesaid decision. The amendment is a forward step in extendingthe benefit to job-workers/manufacturer and ensuring thefree flow of credits.
 
·        The new rule also clarifies that the provisions of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 relating to reversal of credit in respect of inputs and input services used in manufacture of exempted goods or for provision of exempted services, shall not apply to the Input service distributor.  Earlier, there prevailed doubts as to the inter-play between the operation of Rule 6 and Rule 7. It was not clear whether the amounts are to be distributed firstly as per Rule 7 and then, the CENVAT Credit entitlement under Rule 6 is to be determined by the recipient unit to whom the credit has been distributed. The amendment seeks to dispel the confusion by unambiguously stating that Rule 6 is not to be applied by an ISD while distributing the credit. It is the unit to whom the credit has been distributed, is to apply Rule 6 upon receiving the distributed credit.
 
·        The existing language of rule 7 indicates that if the Cenvat was attributable to more than one units, then the Cenvat is to be distributed in all the units of the manufacturer irrespective of the fact that the Cenvat is attributable to all the units or not. This anomaly is rectified by new rule which specifically states that the credit will be distributed only in those units in which that service is actually utilized.
 
While ending:-
 
The amendment made in rule 7 seeks to clarify some anomalies prevailing in the existing language of the rule. Further, the provision inserted in respect of outsourced manufacturing units is a welcome step and is outcome of several judgments. Also, the newly inserted rule 7B also extends the facility of free flow of credit and will reduce the litigation. Thus, overview of the amendment makes it clear that this whole exercise has been done to reduce the litigation and may this intention of law makers fulfilled and taken positively by the department.
 

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