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

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2020-2021/3574

Does transportation by own vehicles on the basis of invoice and E-way bill without issuing the consignment note by the transporter be covered under Exempted supply/non GST Supply?
M/s KM Trans Logistics Private limited (AAR Rajasthan) RAJ/AAAR/5/2019-20 dated 20.11.2019
Brief Facts:M/s. K M Trans Logistics Private Limited are engaged in providing transport services to various manufacturers of motor vehicles for carrying their vehicles from the factory to the various cities where the authorised dealers are located. The Applicant has entered into an agreement with various parties and will be providing transportation services with own vehicles but without having LR/GR and therefore, the applicant is claiming that the services are out of the purview of GST and will categorise as non-taxable service.
Issue:
  1. Does transportation by own vehicles on the basis of invoice and E-way bill without issuing the consignment note by the transporter be covered under Exempted supply/non GST Supply?
  2. Whether Rule 42 of the CGST Rules, 2017 (“CGST Rules”) will also apply in case where there is GST and Non-GST Supplies and there is a common consumption of input and input services?
Applicant’s Contention:The applicant has placed reliance on Notification No. 12/2018-Central tax dated 07.03.2018. Stating that through this notification the E way bill rules were amended. They contend that ‘Transport Document Number’ required in Part-B of the E-way bill is described to the notes of the format. As per the notes “Transport Document number indicates Goods Receipt Number or Railway Receipt Number or Forwarding Note number or Parcel way bill number issued by railways or Airway Bill Number or Bill of Lading Number”, so nowhere there is a requirement for mentioning the Consignment No./LR/GR issued by GTA.
The applicant says that the ruling pronounced by AAR on the basis that without issuing Consignment Note/LR/GR goods cannot be transported or E-way bill cannot be generated is not practical. So they have applied before the Appellant authority for Advance Ruling in respect of issue no. (i).
Reasoning of Judgement:The authority has pronounced that the services provided by the appellant are liable to GST under Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017. It has been found by the authority that the appellant has mentioned that they will not be issuing Consignment notes but have not explained as to why they will not be issuing consignment notes and which document will govern the terms of transaction. It was further stated that service provided shall fall under the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (rate) dated 28.06.2017 at S. No. 9, 10 & 11.
It is also told that, a consignment note is only a document by which the responsibilities and rights are reduced in writing and, therefore, existence or for that matter, absence of the said document cannot have any adverse effect on the responsibilities or rights as agreed between the parties. Mere non-issuance of the consignment note does not make them entitled for exemption from payment of GST.
In the instant case, if the lien of the goods id transferred and the appellant becomes responsible for the goods till its safe delivery to the consignee, the service will be classifiable as GTA services.
However, if the vehicles are provided to the client on rental for use as per their requirement, the services will be classifiable as ‘rental services of transport vehicles’. Non-requirement of mentioning of any detail in E-way Bill will not affect liability of payment of GST on any service unless the service has been exempted through an exemption Notification issued by the Government.
Comment:-Mere non issuance of Consignment note doesn’t make a person free from the liability on him. Further the contention that of the applicant that the service be treated as exempt/non GST supply is not tenable.
CA Akanksha Anchaliya
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