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/2018-2019/3514

Whether the books supplied by the Chhattisgarh text book corporation as per instruction of school education department would tantamount to supply of goods or supply of service ?

Case: Chhattisgarh text book corporation

Citation: STC/AAR/08/2018

Issue: Whether the books supplied by the Chhattisgarh  text book corporation as per instruction of school education department would tantamount to supply of goods or supply of service ?

BriefFacts: The issue involved in appeal are filed by M/s Chhattisgarh Text Book Corporation (CTBC), holding GSTIN 22AAAJC0421F1Z8. CTBC is a registered society under Chhattisgarh Society Registration Act,1973. It performs the works of publishing and distribution of books, consequent to getting it printed and distributes such books of different literature at economical prices or free of cost to all Govt, private, subsidized and non-subsidized schools. The applicant has filed an application for seeking advance ruling on supply of books as per instruction of school education department after printing will tantamount to supply of goods or supply of service and the applicant also wants clarification regarding tax rate liability on such supply as per GST Act.

Appellant Contention:- The appellant submitted that CTBC is registered society follows the byelaws of Governement society. The department of education gives instruction to applicant to publish and provide books to various Government schools. Its price is also decided by Board members. The SCERT, a wing of Government prescribes the syllabus and content of book. The Text Book corporation gets syllabus from him and pays the royalty for the same. The book contains publisher name as CGTB, content owner as SCERT and printer’s name. The CTBG purchase the paper and gives on job work basis to printers. CGTB circulates the book to different areas as per direction of Government. In case of excess book or wrong printing of books, the loss is bearable by CTBG.

 

Respondent’s Contention and Reasoning of Judgement:  CTBG performs following activities namely preparation of syllabus, printing of books, upkeep of books and distribution to schools and transportation of books.

The definition of “Composite Supply” given under Section 2(30) of CGST Act, 2017 clearly covers this activity of printing, packing and distribution of books by CTBC. The ownership of such books always remains with the applicant and never transferred to School Education Department. The work of publishing and distribution of books, consequent to getting it printed and supply of books, printed with logo, design, name, address or other contents supplied by the recipient of such printed goods, are composite supplies. It is to be noted that in case of composite supplies, taxability is determined by the principal supply. It clearly indicates it been the case where the printer of books engaged by Chhattisgarh text book corporation for getting the books printed where only the content is supplied by the publisher and supply of printing would definitely qualify being treated as the principle supply and such supplies would constitute supply of service, which is not the case here. In the instant case the applicant has submitted that it provides such paper to job workers for getting the content printed as provide by SCERT. Therefore in view of the evidences furnished before us and as discussed above, we are inclined to hold that in this case supply of goods is involved which means ‘supply of specified printed educational books’, which is principal supply and accordingly we come to the considered conclusion that the said supply merits being treated as printed books and attracts zero rate, under notification no. 2/2017-state tax (rate) no.F-10-43/2017CT/V/70, dated 28.06.2017, under HSN code 4901.

Decision: It is considered as supply of goods which attracts zero rate.

Comment:  The gist of this case is that supply of books by Chhattisgarh text book corporation to all the govt. private, subsidized and non-subsidized school as per direction of department of education is considered as supply of goods and attracts zero tax rate.

 

However, a circular number 11/11/2017 dated October 20, 2017 was issued by the CBIC wherein it was clarified that in printing of book where content belong to author then it is supply of service. However, in current decision, it is declared as supply of goods. Hence, again there is dispute between advance ruling and circular.

But a thin line can be drawn on the basis of facts of the case. The impugned CBIC circular is with respect of printer but here the Chhattisgarh Text Book Corporation is not printer but get it printed from someone else. However, the content belongs to other person in this case also.

Prepared by Kasif

 

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