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

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2018-2019/3523

Whether ITC would be available in respect of GST paid for hotel stay in case of rent free accommodation provided to MD and GM?.......
Case:M/s Posco India Pune Processing Centre Private Limited
Citation:AAR no. GST-ARA-3/2018-19/B-110 dated 07.09.2018
Issue:
  • Whether ITC would be available in respect of GST paid for hotel stay in case of rent free accommodation provided to MD and GM?
  • Whether invoice for quality claim raised by the Company on POSCO Daewoo Corporation located in Korea will be treated as ‘export of service’?
  • Whether recovery of 50% of the Parents Health Insurance expenses from employee in respect of insurance provided by the Company amounts to ‘supply of service'?
 
Brief facts:
M/s. POSCO-India Pune Processing Center Private Limited (‘the Company’) is South Korea based company located at Talegaon, MIDC, Pune. The Company is primarily engaged in distribution of steel coils. The POSCO Group Company from overseas has deputed a Managing Director (‘MD’) and General Manager (‘GM’) in India for looking after the business in India. In the present case, both the above key personnel have relocated to India without family. Therefore, as per the terms of deputation, instead of making payment in cash, the MD and the GM are provided with perquisite in the nature of rent-free accommodation. The MD and the GM are provided accommodation in a hotel and the cost of the same is borne by the Applicant. It is included as perquisites in the salary as per the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Company had imported goods from POSCO Daewoo Corporation, Korea and availed ITC of IGST on the same. Subsequently, the Company sold the goods to its customer under the cover of tax invoice on payment of applicable GST. Subsequent to the sale, it was observed that the goods were defective and therefore the Company raised a credit note to its customer and the customer raised a debit note.  As per the terms of the contract between POSCO Daewoo and the Company, the Company was required to charge back the loss incurred because of quality issue. Accordingly, the Company raised a tax invoice against which it received payment in foreign currency.
It was submitted by the Company that it is in their practice to provide mediclaim cover to the employees as well as their parents. Initially, the Company pays the entire premium along with taxes and then recovers 50% of the premium from the employees on a monthly basis.
 
Reasoning of Judgment:The AAR has observed that the rent free accommodation provided to the MD and GM was for their personal comforts. Therefore no ITC can be allowed in respect of hotel stay / loading – boarding / accommodation service provided to MD and GM of the Company in accordance with the provisions of section 17(5)(g) of the CGST Act, 2017 which restricts credit of expenses used for personal consumption.
The AAR has observed that the Company has not provided entire details in respect of the transaction. It was submitted by the Company that post the importation of goods, Input Tax credit of IGST was availed and then the goods were sold to its customer, which were found to be defective. Accordingly, credit notes and debit notes were exchanged between the Company and its customer. It has not been stated by the Company as to what is the status of the defective goods or the credit availed on IGST. As long as the goods are with the customer, it is them who are tolerating the act and not the Company. In light of such unanswered questions, it was noted by the Authority that complete details regarding the transaction have not been submitted and therefore they have refrained from answering to this question.
In regards to recovery of 50% of insurance premium from its employees, the AAR had observed that the Company is creating fiction of providing health insurance to their employees only to avail 100% ITC of payment made to the insurance company. The AAR has ruled that the recovery of such insurance premium from the employees cannot be treated as supply and consequently, the Company would not be eligible for ITC paid on such expenses to the insurance company.
 
Comment:  There were the two contradicting rulings given by two different State AARs on the same issue of – “employer providing services to employees and whether the amount recovered for the same shall be treated as a supply” within the time span of March and September 2018.
In both the cases i.e. Caltech Polymers Pvt Ltd (ORDER No.CT/531118-C3 DATED 26/03/2018) and the discussed case, we hope that Revenue generation may be considered and ruling is given based on the same. It is said so because in the first case, recovery of food expenses from the employees for the canteen services provided by company would come under the definition of ‘outward supply‘  as defined in Section 2(83) and therefore taxable as supply of service. And in the second case recovery of Parents health insurance expenses from employees does not amount to “supply of service” under the GST laws and the applicant cannot avail ITC on GST charged by insurance company.
Moreover, it is been clearly evident from the facts that MD and GM have been provided with the rent free accomdation since they relocated in India, and they should be treated as part of perquisites and therefore, ITC should be admissible.
Prepared by:  Adit Gupta
 
 
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