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: 27 Feb, 2010
Print   |    |  Comment

Unfolding the levy on Umbrella

 

  

Unfolding the levy on Umbrella

 

Prepared By:

CA Pradeep Jain

Mayank Palgauta

Bharat Rathore

 

As the budget, 2010-11 has brought many changes in Excise Law. It varies from areas like applicable rate of excise duty, their Cenvat Credit allowable, exemption from excise duty and so many.  The duty on umbrella and umbrella parts are closely affected due to applicability of new Notifications inserted in this Budget. Therefore, we are giving the analysis / comparison of notifications which will help to know how they will affect upon manufacturer at the time of purchase of materials as well as at the time of clearance of finished products.

 

EARLIER POSITION: -

 

Before coming of the Budget 2010-11 into force, the rate of duty was applicable on the manufacturer of umbrella parts was 8%. But the umbrella was cleared at the rate of 4% excise duty by virtue of notification no. 5/06 dated 03.01.2006. This exemption was listed at 5B of the aforesaid Exemption Notification. Moreover, the umbrella cloth panel was exempted from duty by virtue of notification no. 3/05 CE dated 24.02.2005. It is listed at serial no. 79 of the said notification.

 

The overall effect of the same was that the Umbrella parts manufacturer was paying duty from PLA while clearing their goods. But Umbrella manufacturers were procuring inputs at the rate of 8% and the finished goods were cleared at lesser duty of 4%. Thus, Cenvat credit of duty paid on raw material was accumulating continuously at the hands of manufacturer of umbrella and which was going to remain unutilised with them.

 

POSITION AFTER APPLICABILITY OF BUDGET 2010-11: -

 

Now the former situation has changed as Budget 2010-11 comes into force.  In budget 2010-11, the exemption from umbrella cloth panel was deleted by virtue of notification no. 7/2010 dated 27.02.2010. On the other hand; Parts of Umbrella, Sun Umbrella including umbrella panels are chargeable to excise duty @ 4% by virtue of notification no. 11/2010 dated 27.02.2010.

 

END RESULT OF BUDGET 2010-11: -

 

The substantial effect of the deletion of earlier notifications applied to manufacturer of umbrella as well as insertion of new notifications in Budget 2010-11 is that it is proved to fetch simplicity in chain of supplier and purchaser as it brings universal rate of duty at every stage of purchase, production and clearance of umbrella. Now, onwards manufacturers of umbrella will not have any excess amount of Cenvat Credit lying with them unutilised.

 

But on the other side, manufacturer of umbrella parts are getting their steel inputs @ 8% and has to pay duty @ 4% only.  Umbrella parts manufacturer will not be able to utilise the Cenvat credit and accumulation will start at their end.

 

 Thus these amendments in Budget 2010-11 will prove beneficial for those manufacturers who manufacture and clear “umbrella as well as umbrella cloth panel” by two way. Firstly the universal rate of duty is applicable and secondly they will be able to utilise unused Cenvat credit.

 

**********

 

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