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/2018-2019/3526

Whether used lead acid batteries qualify as second hand goods and covered under Margin Scheme?
 Case: Ms. Shambhu Traders Pvt Ltd. (GST AAR Rajasthan)
 
Citation:  Advance Ruling No. RAJ/AAR/2018-19/35 dated 15.02.2019
 
Issue: Whether used lead acid batteries qualify as second hand goods and covered under Margin Scheme?
 
Brief Facts: The Applicant is engaged in the business of selling used lead acid batteries to various manufacturers.On purchase of used lead acid batteries from unregistered suppliers, the Applicant subsequently sells them to various manufacturers and charges GST on the difference between the sale price and purchase price of lead acid batteries in accordance with Rule 32(5) of the CGST Rules.
It is in this aforesaid background, the Applicant seeks determination on the question as to whether the used lead acid batteries qualify as ‘second hand goods’ and thus covered under the Margin Scheme notified under Rule 32(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
If yes, then the Tax on Outward Supply under the Margin Scheme would be qualified under which heading in GSTR-3B.
When the Applicant is operating under the Margin Scheme notified under Moreover, Rule 32(5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 (“CGST Rules, 2017”) is applicable on both intra as well as interstate supplies.
 
 
Appellant’s Contention:For goods to qualify as second hand goods as per Rule 32(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017 such goods need be (1) used goods as such or goods after minor processing that does not change the nature of goods (2) goods on which no Input Tax Credit has been availed.
It is submitted that used lead acid batteries are used goods and no processing is done on such goods. Therefore, these used lead acid batteries qualify as second hand goods in as much as these goods are ‘used goods as such’. Further, the Applicant does not avail Input Tax Credit on such used lead acid batteries.
Reference may also be placed on the Press Release dated 15th July, 2017 of the GST Council wherein the clarification issued in respect of the used bottles shall squarely be applicable in respect of the used lead acid batteries as just like used bottles no processing is done on the used lead acid batteries. Therefore, in the Applicant’s view, these used lead acid batteries qualify to be second hand goods. Accordingly, the Applicant dealer is entitled to operate under the Margin Scheme in respect of the used lead acid batteries.
Applicant interpreted in respect of second question that the person working under the Margin Scheme whether selling goods within the state or outside the state will classify the Taxable Supply under Point 3.1(a) while filing the Return GSTR 3B i.e. outward taxable Supplies
Therefore, the Applicant is of the view that it is entitled to make inter-state supplies of used lead acid batteries while operating under the Margin Scheme.
Respondent’s Contention and Reasoning of Judgment: The respondent agreed that the lead acid batteries qualify for second hand goods and therefore, margin scheme is applicable on the same keeping in view the contentions of the applicant.
The authority clarified that as the query raised by the applicant regarding qualification of tax on such outward supply in GSTR 3B is not specified in Section 97(2) of CGST Act/RGST Act, 2017, therefore, no advance ruling can be given on this aspect.
Section 20 of the IGST Act prescribes that the provisions of the CGST Act shall mutatis mutandis apply to various subjects which have been provided under Section 20. The subject pertaining to time and value of supply ‘ is also covered under Section 20, hence the rules made under CGST Act in relation to valuation of a supply is applicable to IGST Act as well.
Therefore, Rule 32(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017 which provides for Margin Scheme in case of intra-state supplies shall also be applicable in case of inter-state supplies.
 
Comment: Margin scheme has lowered the burden of taxes on second hand goods dealers. AAR has also taken a lenient approach while pronouncing ruling and clarified that if two conditions are satisfied to qualify as second hand goods, then margin scheme would be applicable in that case. GST has made ways simpler for the dealers dealing in such goods.
 
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