J N A and Associates

07/12/2021

Advance Ruling (Gujarat)

GACL NALCO Alkalies & Chemicals Pvt Ltd.,

GST-ITC not available on leasing charges of land that is used for Construction of Factory

Becasue , It covers under blocked credit as per sec 17(5)(d) of CGST act

11/10/2021

The Orissa high court has ruled that deposits required to be submitted for appealing in a dispute under the goods and services tax (GST) has to be paid through cash ledger only. Experts say this could impact those businesses which have huge input tax credit lying unused.

The order was announced in a case where the petitioner said that he had paid these deposits, called pre-deposits in technical jargon, through electronic credit ledger and even then additional commissioner of sales tax (appeal) rejected his appeal.

The court said it is unable to find any error having been committed by the appellate authority in rejecting the petitioner's contention that the electronic credit ledger could be debited for the purpose of making the payment of pre-deposit.

Rajat Mohan, senior partner AMRG & Associates, said the ruling will have a negative impact on businesses having a huge chunk of accumulated tax credit such as start-ups and the companies in the textile sector.

He said in business language authorities will not differentiate between the balance lying in electronic cash and credit ledger as both are meant to be utilised for payment of output taxes.

Under the GST laws, an appellant has to pay ten per cent of amount of tax in dispute as pre-deposit. For the next appeal, an additional 20 per cent has to be paid.

After introduction of rule 86 A everybody feels like noit credit ledger is as precious as cash ledger

But department is differentiating because unless it gets some thing which is not there than only they feel like blessed and correct but it's not the same with a reasonable business man he knows the value of working capital..particularly after the pandemic. .

11/10/2021

The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR):-
Ruled that GST is payable on complete billing amount including employer portion of Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF) and Employees’ State Insurance (ESl) amount.

The applicant, Ex-servicemen Resettlement Society is a registered society providing security services and scavenging services (Karma Bandhus) to different Medical Colleges & Hospitals, District Hospitals, and other hospitals of the Government of West Bengal.
As per labor laws of the Government of West Bengal, the applicant claims Minimum Wage + Employer Portion of 13% EPF plus 3.25% ESI and charges tax at the rate of 18% leviable under the GST Act on gross bill amount in every month for providing security & Karma Bandhus (Scavenging) services to the Government Hospitals.

However, the Audit Authority (Indian Audit and Accounts Department, West Bengal) in course of audit of Bankura Sammilani Medical College &. Hospital has raised the objection of excess payment of GST upon the observation that `GST’ to be payable only on Management Fees/Services Charges

05/10/2021

Calcutta HC ruled that , GST Registration can not be cancelled if the business was not carried out from the principle place of business due this pandemic.pandamic

27/09/2021

M/s. Gensol Ventures pvt.

Advanced ruling:-

In the present scenario, the arrangement between the applicant and the Driver/s is such that the applicant collects the consideration(after discount) from the customer and remits total consideration to Driver/s. In this situation where discount is offered by the applicant to customer, and Driver/s does not bear (the expense of) discount offered since it is offered by the applicant. And so, the applicant remits the entire value of supply(without reducing the discount amount) to Driver/s. In other words, the remittance made by the applicant to Driver constitutes of two components: (a) amount collected from the customer (b) amount equivalent to the discount offered to the customer, which is a marketing expense for the applicant, and contributed by it in the present case. In the instant case, marketing expenses (of the applicant) paid by the applicant to Driver cannot be said to be consideration for or towards any service by Driver, since no reciprocal activity is performed by Driver in order to receive such compensation. The Bombay High Court, in Bai Mamubai Trust & Others vs. Suchitra [2019(31)GSTL 193(Bom)] has held that enforceable reciprocal obligations are essential aspect of a supply. Similarly, the CESTAT in Ruchi Soya Industries ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Central GST and Excise, Indore [TS-301-CESTAT-2021-ST] in context of service tax law, held that it is essential to establish the

Basic elements for levy of tax i.e service provider,
services receiver,
payment of consideration from service recipient to service provider,
services etc.
In the absence of services, the relationship of service provider and recipient, tax cannot be applied and levied

ON DISCOUNT GIVEN TO CUSTOMERS BY THE COMPANY CLAIMED AS MARKETING EXPENSES AND AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM CUSTOMERES + DISCOUNT AVAILED BY CUSTOMERS OR MARKETING EXP TO COMPNAY = TOTAL AMOUNT PAID TO DRIVERS HERE TAX LEVIED ONLY ON THE AMOUNT REALISED FROM THE SRERVICE PROVIDER AND SERVICE RECEIVER RELEATIONSHIP ONLY.

02/09/2021

The social media post had pictures of round and flat papads placed next to each other. Sharing the post, Harsh Goenka, chairman of RPG Enterprises, tweeted, "Did you know that a round papad is exempt from GST and a square papad attracts GST ? Can anyone suggest a good chartered accountant who can make me understand the logic?"New Delhi:

Papad, whatever its shape or name, is exempted from GST, the government's indirect taxation agency clarified today after a social media post claimed that a round papad is exempted from the tax while a square variant attracts it.

The social media post had pictures of round and flat papads placed next to each other. Sharing the post, Harsh Goenka, chairman of RPG Enterprises, tweeted, "Did you know that a round papad is exempt from GST and a square papad attracts GST ? Can anyone suggest a good chartered accountant who can make me understand the logic?"

Did you know that a round papad is exempt from GST and a square papad attracts GST ? Can anyone suggest a good chartered accountant who can make me understand the logic? pic.twitter.com/tlu159AdIJ
— Harsh Goenka () August 31, 2021
In reply to some queries on how he got this information, Mr Goenka said a friend had told him.

Papad, by whatever name known, is exempt from GST vide Entry No. 96 of GST notification No.2/2017-CT(R). This entry does not distinguish based on the shape of papad. This notification is available at https://t.co/ckIfjzg8hwhttps://t.co/19GbQJvYZe
— CBIC () August 31, 2021

“Did you know that a round papad is exempt from GST and a square papad attracts GST ? Can anyone suggest a good chartered accountant who can make me understand the logic?”

02/09/2021

1.Cause
and
2.effect

Finally Papad got relief from GST

16/08/2021

GST Update:-
Mismatch between GSTR 2A vs GSTR 3B,

We have completed the fourth year of the biggest indirect tax reform in India. In the last one year, we have witnessed numerous assessees under the GST receiving notices from the department asking them to explain the mismatch of Input Tax Credit (ITC) claimed in their returns (i.e. GSTR-3B) vis-à-vis GSTR-2A. The assesses have been asked to reverse

Doctrine of Impossibility-:

The Department cannot arbitrarily reject the ITC on account of the mismatch between ITC claimed in Form GSTR-3B vis-à-vis ITC reflecting in Form GSTR -2A on the GST portal. As per Section 16 (2) (c) of the CGST Act, benefit of ITC cannot be denied to the taxpayer on account of default of the supplier, over whom the taxpayer does not have any control. At this juncture, the legal maxim, lex non cogit ad impossibilia, comes into play that postulates that law cannot compel a man to do that which cannot possibly be performed.

The law cannot compel the Noticee to do the impossible, i.e., to ensure that the Supplier has paid the tax to the Government. It is unjust to deny credit to the Noticee on failure on part of Supplier to furnish details on the same in time

Crux:-

cannotpossiblybeperformed.

05/08/2021

17/07/2021

GST UPDATE:-

ADVANCE RULING,

AADHYA GOLD PVT LTD,

Whether GST is to be paid only on the difference between the selling price and purchase price as stipulated under Rule 32(5) of CGST Rules, 2017, if applicant purchases used/ second hand gold jewellery from individuals who are not dealers under the GST and at the time of sale there is no change in the form / nature of goods?

ANSWER:-YES
because,A. In the case of applicant dealing in second hand goods and invoicing his supplies as “second hand goods”, the valuation of supply of second hand gold jewellery which are purchased from individuals who are not registered under GST and there is no change in the form and nature of such goods, can be made as prescribed under sub-rule (5) of rule 32 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules

He is selling as it is by just polishing and cleaning and not availing ITC on purchase because second hand gold from individuals those were non GST dealers now the effective value of supply = sale value - purchase value on that GST has to pay on that item if sale

17/07/2021

GST UPDATE:-
Advance ruiling:-

Went by ,M/s B.G Shirke Constructions Technology Private Limited

What is the applicable GST rate on construction of AAI(Airport authority of india) residential colony at Devenhalli, near Kempegowda International Airport, Bengaluru by the applicant for Airport Authority of India?

Answer from Adcance ruling authority:
The Airport authority of India being recipient of service fulfils the parameters as mentioned in the Notification No.31/2017-CT(R) dated 13.10.2017 vide paragraph (iii) item number (ix) as “Governmental Authority”.attracts tax at the rate of 12% as per Notification No.11/2017-Central Tax dated 28.06.2017 (6% CGST + 6% KGST) as amended by Notification No.24/2017-CT(R) dated 21.09.2017

14/07/2021

GST on members contribution to RWA(Resident welfare association) if the amount exceeds Rs 5000/- or Rs 7500/- now GST applicability on total amount of contribution or on the amount exceeds above limit??

New judgement from

The Madras High Court while quashing the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) held that the Resident Welfare Association (RWA) liable to pay GST on the members’ monthly contribution, only on the amount exceeding Rs.5000 / Rs.7500 and not on the entire amount
The TVH Lumbini Square Owners Association moved the Madras High Court against the AAR’s ruling.

Representing TVH Lumbini Square Owners Association, Mr. G. Natarajan, Advocate argued that at the time of introduction of GST the Central Board of Indirect Tax and Customs issued a Flyer clarifying that GST is payable only on the amount in excess, but later they changed track and issued a circular to the contrary. Wherever the intention was to deny the exemption if the consideration exceeds a fixed sum, it was specifically provided like in the case of performing artists, where GST is exempted only if their charges for performance is less than Rs.1,50,000, whereas in case of RWA, the exemption was upto Rs.7,500 it was argued.

The single judge bench of Justice Anita Sumanth held that that the conclusion of the AAR as well as the Circular to the effect that any contribution above Rs.7,500/- would disentitle the RWA to exemption, is contrary to the express language of the Entry in question and both stand quashed. To clarify, it is only contributions to RWA in excess of Rs.7,500/- that would be taxable under GST Act.