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

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2018-2019/3517

Whether any particular thing (preparation and serving of food to children of government schools under Mid day Meal and government sponsored Anganwadi meals program/ sale of scrap items generated during Mid day meal program) done by the applicant with resp
Case:M/s The Akshaya Patra Foundation
Citation:RAJ/AAR/2018- 19/28,F.No.IV(4)26/AAR/RAJ/2018-19/134-135
 
Issue:Whether any particular thing (preparation and serving of food to children of government schools under Mid day Meal and government sponsored Anganwadi meals program/ sale of scrap items generated during Mid day meal program) done by the applicant with respect to any goods or services or both amounts to or results in a supply of goods or services?
Brief facts:The Applicant, Akshayapatra Foundation is registered with the GSTN 08AAATT6468P1ZL, is nonprofit organization. It’s headquarter is at Bengaluru and having establishments in 12 states across India. The applicant is serving meal to more than 17 lakhs students which are studying in 14000 Schools over in 12 states across the country. The applicant have rental income and the applicant is also registered under section 12AA (i.e. charitable trust) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The applicant strives to eliminate classroom hunger by implementing the Mid-Day meal scheme in the Government and Government aided schools. It also aims at countering malnutrition and supporting the right education of socio-economically disadvantaged Children. The applicant tries to banish hunger of the deprived economically backward and poor sections of the society and those hailing from rural area and slums in cities by every possible method, by providing free food. It seeks resort on whether Preparing and serving of food to children under Mid day meal and Anganwadi meals programme shall amount to Supply. Further sale of scrap items generated during mid day meal is covered under the scope of Supply or not.
Appellant’s contention:The appellant is operating 38 kitchens across 12 states in the country under the Guidelines wherein food grains and expenses for other ingredients, cooking cost and transportation expenses shall be reimbursed by the government. For each of the kitchen a MOU strictly as per the Guidelines of MHRD has been entered into with the respective authorities. Some important part of the Guidelines are extracted below which has a bearing on the question raised for advance ruling.
In Rajasthan a MOU entered with District Education Officer (Elementary Education), Jodhpur for serving Mid-Day meal to about 12000 Government school children dated 24th Oct 2016 which is valid for 3 years is enclosed. The key terms and conditions of the MOU which are important for the current context is mentioned below:
 1. Government would provide the Food Grains at an agreed quantum per child / meal for the expected average attendance in advance. Applicant shall provide the monthly report of details covering food grains received, utilized and balance in the prescribed format.
 2. For other food ingredients and conversion costs, Government would provide the cash conversion cost at agreed rates per child / meal.
3. To enable to reach nutritious, hygienically prepared quality meals to the children, applicant can raise donation, both in cash and kind to meet out deficit
4. All the additional expenses that may be required, on the preparation of the Mid-Day Meal as well as the transportation of the cooked meals to the schools in the project area shall be borne by the applicant
5. Menu will be in accordance as specified by the state Government from time to time
The applicant state that the above terms are mentioned commonly in all the MOUs entered into between the applicant with respective State Government. The copies of MOUs entered with Government of Gujarat for the implementing MDM program in Ahmedabad and with Government of Andhra Pradesh for implementing MDM program in Kuppam town provided with application as sample for reference.
The applicant raises funds by way of donation from Corporates, Trusts & Foundations and general public for meeting the expenditure incurred on Mid-Day meal program apart from free grains and food conversion cost received from government. The certified extract of official website of the applicant requesting for fund support from Donors is also enclosed, which shows the total cost, government subsidy and the deficit amount to be supported from donations.In course of providing Mid-Day Meal sometimes certain goods like spices, food grains, kitchen equipment and relevant spares (Boiler, Conveyor Belt Spares etc.), office equipment (Laptop, Computer, Stationery, Letter Head etc.), distribution vehicles are transferred from one kitchen of the applicant to another kitchen situated in a different state. It may be noted that the applicant has taken registration in various states for discharging GST liability on rental income and therefore they are 'distinct person' for the purpose of GST. During course of the activity of Mid-Day Meal, certain scrap in the form of empty oil & other tins, pipes & iron, empty bags, plastic items, cartoons, Flex & Boxes, spares parts of machine/equipment, vehicle & its parts like tyres etc. is generated which is sold from time to time. The sale proceeds of these items are recorded under the head 'miscellaneous income' in the books of accounts.
The applicant also carries out other charitable feeding programs such as Anganwadi feeding, wherein the part of the cost is met by Government Subsidy and the remaining cost is met through donations, private school feeding programs where entire 100% cost is met through donations. These programs are quite small in number and constitute about 10% of the total volume of meals. In none of the above programs, the applicant, charge/receive any money or consideration from the beneficiaries.

Reasoning of Judgement: The Respondent has undergone an analysis of the appellant’s contention that Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2), the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, specify, by notification, the transactions that are to be treated as,
  1. a supply of goods and not as a supply of services
 or
 (b) a supply of services and not as a supply of goods.
 Further, the definition of business under Section 2(17) of CGST Act includes,
 
 
(a) any trade, commerce, manufacture, profession, vocation, adventure, wager or any other similar activity, whether or not it is for a pecuniary benefit
 (b) any activity or transaction in connection with or incidental or ancillary to sub-clause (a); (c) any activity or transaction in the nature of sub-clause (a), whether or not there is volume, frequency, continuity or regularity of such transaction
 (d) supply or acquisition of goods including capital goods and services in connection with commencement or closure of business
 (e) provision by a club, association, society, or any such body (for a subscription or any other consideration) of the facilities or benefits to its members
 (f) admission, for a consideration, of persons to any premises
(g) services supplied by a person as the holder of an office which has been accepted by him in the course or furtherance of his trade, profession or vocation
(h) services provided by a race club by way of totalisator or a licence to book maker in such club
(i) any activity or transaction undertaken by the Central Government, a State Government or any local authority in which they are engaged as public authorities;~ The word 'commerce' has several definitions which are as under:-As per Business Dictionary, it means exchange of goods or services for money or in kind, usually on a large scale enough to require transportation from place to place or across city, state or national boundaries.
In view of the above observations, the activity of preparation and serving of food under Mid Day Meal and Anganwadi meal programme undertaken by the applicant is covered under definition of business.
As per the documents submitted by the applicant They observe that the applicant is reimbursed as per the rate fixed by the Government of India or by the State Government for the transportation charges for lifting food grains from Food Corporation of India godown on basis of the release order.
It is further observed that the applicant is also paid /reimbursed of the cooking cost of the meals as per the instructions/norms of GOI / State Govt.
There is no exemption granted to charitable trusts in case of supply of goods which are taxable and are not specifically exempt or Nil rated. In case of exemption, a charitable trust is required to comply with certain conditions and the applicant is not covered in any of such activities.
The activities undertaken by the applicant under Mid-Day Meal Programme and Anganwadi meals programme is a supply in accordance with the Section 7 of CGST Act, 2017. However, MDM programme is taxed Nil by the virtue of Notification No. 12/2017 dated 28.06.2017 mentioned at serial number 66 heading number 9962.
The Preparation and serving of food under Government sponsored Anganwadi meals programme which is undertaken by the applicant who receives reimbursement from the government of Rajasthan @ Rs.5.40 per pregnant women/lactating & nursing mothers/adolescent girls and Rs. 5.25 per child per day. Therefore, the above said activity is against consideration and hence it is covered under the scope of 'supply' as per section 7 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017.
As the activity of 'transfer' is covered under definition of supply under section 7 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017. Thus, the transfer of goods / capital equipments, exclusively used for Mid-Day Meal (MDM) program and Anganwadi meals program sponsored by Government, between different kitchens of applicant which are 'distinct persons' as per GST law is covered under the scope of 'supply' as per section 7 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017.
The scrap items which generates during course of the activity of Mid-Day Meal in form of empty oil 86 other tins, pipes 86 iron, empty bags, plastic items, cartoons, Flex 8& Boxes, spare parts of machine / equipment, vehicle 8& its parts like tyres etc. are sold from time to time is for a consideration. The sale proceeds of these items are recorded under the head miscellaneous income in the books of records. The sale of scrap is an activity of sale for a consideration as mentioned in definition of 'supply' as per section 7 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017.
Decision:The activity of  Preparation and serving of food to children of government schools under Mid-Day meal Program of Government and serving of food under Government sponsored Anganwadi meals program is covered under the scope of 'supply'. Further the transfer of goods/ capital equipments for the programs carried out by the applicant sponsored by government is covered under the scope of Supply as per section 7 of CGST Act. And sale of scrap items generated during Mid day meal is as well covered under the scope of Supply.
Comment: The Gist of the case is that preparation and serving of food to children of government schools under mid day meal program and government sponsored Anganwadi meals are covered under the scope of Supply. Though the activities provided by the applicant is for charitable purposes registered under Section 12AA and for social cause but in order to be out of ambit of definition of supply it needs to satisfy the specified conditions.
 
Prepared by:Himanshu Bhimani
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