1. [2019] 110 taxmann.com 264 (Bombay) Bhattad Industries Pvt Ltd
Section 83 of CGST/SGST which deals with provisional attachment of bank accounts. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court held that an Assistant Commissioner cannot merely attach the Bank accounts without proper application of mind. Any provisional attachment can only be done consequent to a speaking order of the Commissioner. This ensures due application of mind by a senior officer to the facts of the case before an attachment of a bank account is ordered. The Hon'ble Court directed defreezing of the attachments.
2. [2019] 111 taxmann.com 140 (AAAR-Maharashtra) NES Global Specialist Engineering Services P Ltd
Departmental Appeal was against the AAR Order, wherein it was held that the transaction of supplying highly skilled man power services to a country in Abu Dhabi was an Export of Services and hence a zero rated supply. In the Appeal by the Jurisdictional officer, it was held that since Section 97(2) of the CGST Act does not include determination of place of supply, the question ought not to have been answered by the Maha AAR Authority and the decision of the AAR was set aside.
3. [2019] 109 taxmann.com 340 (Gujarat) (HC) Vimal Yashwantgiri Goswani vs. Gujarat
In an interim Order the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court stated that, the powers of arrest under Section 69 of the Act, 2017 are to be exercised with lot of care and circumspection. Prosecution should normally be launched only after the adjudication is completed. To put it in other words, there must be in the first place a determination that a person is "liable to a penalty". Till that point of time, the entire case proceeds on the basis that there must be an apprehended evasion of tax by the assessee. In the two decisions referred to above, emphasis has been laid on the safeguards as enshrined under the Constitution of India and in particular Article 22 which pertains to arrest and Article 21 which mandates that no person shall be deprived of his life and liberty for the authority of law. The two High Courts have extensively relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal [1997] (1) SCC 416. In the light of the same, the Department was directed to take no coercive recovery steps.
4. [2019] 108 taxmann.com 212 Rotary Club Nariman Point (AAR - Maharashtra)
The question by the applicant was whether pecuniary contributions from the members in the Administration Account, which are recovered for covering the expenses for the weekly and other meetings and other petty administrative expenses, this also include the expenses for the location and light refreshments, amounts to or results in a supply, within the meaning of supply. The main contention was with regards to Principle of Mutuality.
It was held that, under the GST the scope of Supply and Services is very wide. Anything which is not goods is classified as services. The aim of the association and its members is inconsequential. Since the definition of the term business also includes provision by club, association, society, or any such body (for a subscription or any other consideration) of the facilities or benefits to its members, therefore the membership fee is consideration. Once the preceding facts are established, tax is payable on collection of such membership fees.
PS: This AAR was given before the Calcutta Club judgment of the Supreme Court. Similar views have been taken by the Appellate Authorities in Lions Club Kothrud [2019] 111 taxmann.com 135 (AAAR-Maharashtra).
5. [2019] 110 taxmann.com 445 (Bombay) High Ground Enterprises Ltd vs. Maharashtra
The Hon'ble High Court was dealing with the powers of the Proper officer to restrain from providing copies of the materials seized during investigation. It was held that section 67(5) of the Act creating right in the person, the denial of copies must be a reasonable action. The legislative intent is clear that the documents or books seized must not be kept in the custody of the officer for more than the period necessary for its examination and copies thereof need to be given to the person from whose custody the said documents or books are seized. The reasonableness of the action depends on the facts of each case. In the present case, since the documents seized were available on soft copies, the argument of the department that the Petitioner may interfere in the investigation of other associated companies was denied by the Hon'ble Court. The Hon'ble Court also stated that there is no need for the Petitioner to Justify the reason for such copies.
It was held that, if the right to get copies of the documents and the power of the authorities to refuse the same has to be balanced, then the balance may shift by the passage of time and continuing withholding of copies can become unreasonable assuming it is justified at the inception. The documents were seized in January 2019, and the petition is being heard in the middle of August 2019. The prejudice to the Petitioner has been demonstrated. Therefore the Hon'ble Court directed production of the seized documents.
6. [2019] 109 taxmann.com 372 (AAR - Maharashtra) Mansmarine Cargo International LLP
Applicant was rendering management consultancy services to foreign clients outside India and got offered an outsourcing contract for managing shipping operations of a Hong Kong based company for arranging or facilitating business of its foreign client by liaisoning with their customers. Since applicant is arranging or facilitating supply of goods or services or both between various persons, applicant is an intermediary. Therefore it was held that as per provisions of section 13, place of provision of service is location of supplier of services, place of supply is in taxable territory, and applicant will be liable to discharge GST on said management fees.
As regards whether GST is applicable on the reimbursement of expenses such as salaries, rent, office expenses, travelling cost etc. It was held that since in the normal course of business these will be administration/establishment cost borne by the supplier of service, therefore as per Section 15 he valuation of supply will include all costs, including the employee cost provided by one distinct entity to the other distinct entities.
7. (2019) 109 TX 373 Fluid Power (AAR-Maharashtra) dated 23-08-2019
The question was in relation to the applicability of the GST for Marine Duty Hydraulic equipment. It was claimed that such equipment is designed and customized to be fitted on a barge falling under Sl. No.246 of Schedule-I of Notification 1 of 2017 and its parts fell under Sl. No. 252 of Schedule-I of Notification 1 of 2017. It was held that the tax rate of 5% will be applicable as per the Schedule claimed by the applicant since these are both essentially required for the functioning of the barge. It was also held that the ITC in respect of all indigenous and imported inputs used for manufacture of the above equipment will be available.
8. (2019) 109 TX 220 TATA Steel vs. Jharkhand dated 23-08-2019 (HC)
This was a challenge to the circular by the State authorities denying issuance of C-forms to the petitioner with respect to all remaining non-GST goods. The reason behind such a decision was that if the dealer like the petitioner was only using such goods as consumables and not selling the same. Therefore, they are no more liable to pay the tax under VAT Act and accordingly the registration of the petitioner under Section 7(2) of the CST Act will become invalid. The Hon'ble High Court ruled in favour of the petitioner and stated that registration of a dealer under section 7(2) was not subject to payment of tax and therefore the dealer was entitled to continue with their registration.
9. (2019) 110 TX 203 Shri Keshav Cement & Infra (AAR - Karnataka) dated 12-09-19
The question asked by the applicant was in relation the eligibility of ITC under Sections 16 & 17 of CGST Act in respect of inputs, input services and capital goods received towards erection, installation and commissioning of a solar power plant. It was held that goods which are capitalized in the books of account cannot be considered as inputs and hence ITC is ineligible. The reason for the same was that Section 17(5)(c ) states that, works contract services are not eligible to be treated as input service for the purpose of availing ITC unless these services are in relation to plant & machinery. Plant & Machinery has also been described in Section 17(5). As regards eligibility of ITC on input/capital goods it was held that the definition of input under Section 2(59) does not cover capital goods and therefore such goods which are capitalized cannot be taken as inputs.
10. (2019) 110 TX 255 Morigeri Traders (AAR - Karnataka) dated 12-09-2019
Dry chilies are covered under the definition of Agricultural Produce as per Clause of Para-2 of Notification 12/2017. It was observed that dry chilies are produced out of plants and used for food or as raw material. Since the product is derived by merely drying the chilies to make it marketable for the primary market, the process does not alter the essential characteristics of raw chilies.
11. (2019) 110 TX 205 Volvo Eicher Commercial Vehicles Ltd. (AAR - Karnataka)
The applicant herein was a distributor of Volvo buses and trucks. It was also appointed by Volvo Sweden to provide warranty services to the customers on behalf of them. The expenses for carrying out such warranty services were reimbursed by Volvo Sweden to the applicant. Therefore, the question was whether the applicant was providing services to Volvo Sweden which would render it a zero-rated supply. It was held that the customer in this case the buyers were receiving the product, i.e. the buses or trucks, which were bundled with the warranty services and the same was provided within India. Therefore, it was held that such a transaction is a composite supply and that Volvo Sweden is nowhere the recipient of the services. Therefore, such a transaction cannot be treated as export of services and hence the transaction is not a zero-rated supply.
12. (2019) 110 TX 204 Surfa Coats India Pvt Ltd (AAR - Karnataka) dated 12-09-2019
The question related to goods and services procured by the applicant and disposed of/distributed as incentives and gifts for the promotion of business qualified as supply under Section 7. It was held that such transactions do not classify as supply and that section 17(5) even though such incentives are procured from registered supplier and suffered tax at earlier stages, the same cannot be eligible to avail ITC as per Section 17(5).
13. (2020) 114 TX 711 Usmanbhai vs. State of Gujarat (HC) dated 13-09-2019
Where the assessee was arrested for offences punishable under Section 132(1)(b) & (c) on 21st July 2019. Upon application of grant of regular bail and the fact that although the complaint was not filed after two months of the initiation of investigation, the matter was a fit case for the granting of bail since the investigation was almost over.
14. (2019) 109 TX 200 Bai Mamubai Trust (Bombay) (HC) dated 13-09-2019
The single-member Bench of Hon'ble High Court held that services provided by the Court Receiver appointed by the Court under order XL of the CPC are not liable to GST since the Court Receiver is appointed by the Court only for implementing the order of the Court and functions solely under the supervision and direction of the Court, and hence the same is covered under Schedule-III and therefore, services of a Court Receiver shall neither be treated as supply of goods nor supply of services.
The next question before the Hon'ble Court was whether the payment of royalty by the defendant as damages or compensation to the Trust was liable to suffer GST as a supplier. It was held that the basis of payment is the illegal occupation or trespass by the occupants and such a payment cannot be an act of tolerance or forbearance. Since any payment which is to be considered as a consideration towards supply needs reciprocity. Therefore, the payment by the occupant as damages is not liable for tax under GST.
15. (2019) 110 TX 498 Vista Marine & Hydraulics (AAR - Kerala)
For the facts of the case and the agreement between the applicant and its customer, a non-comprehensive repair rate contract was held to be not a composite supply and accordingly the tax rate is applicable to individual supplies. This was held on the basis of the reason that the supply of spare parts/accessories and the repair service are not naturally bundled and are in fact separately identifiable supplies for which rates are quoted differently.
16. (2019) 110 TX 194 Sukee Printpack Llp. (AAR - Karnataka) dated 16-09-2019
Activity of printing book or journal or periodical is covered under Entry 26(i)(d) of Notification 11/2017 i.e. printing of books (including Braille books), journals and periodicals is taxable as 5% GST. But if the final printed material is other than a book or journal or periodical and involve job work of printing all goods under heading of 'printing services No.9988', then such an activity would be covered under Entry-26(ia)(b) and is liable to be taxed at 12%.
17. (2019) 110 TX 255 Carnation Hotel Pvt Ltd (AAR- Karnataka) dated 16-09-2019
Activity of renting out rooms to the employees of SEZ is classified as an Inter-State supply as per Section 7(5)(b) of the IGST Act. Since such an accommodation service is supplied when SEZ or a Unit in SEZ, the same can be treated as a zero-rated supply and the applicant may raise an invoice without charging tax contingent to the applicants executing and LUT.
18. (2019) 110 TX 232 Patabi Enterprises (AAR - Karnataka) dated 17-09-2019
The question sought to be answered herein was whether the applicant who is engaged in the printing to access card, their entire content of printing supplied by the customer and printing including papers etc. belong to the applicant. In this particular case, the so called access card contained general information about a temple complex which is handed out to the pilgrims for free. Therefore, question raised was whether such access card printed was classifiable under HSN 4901 10 20 under the description of 'grocers leaflets and similar printing materials'. It was held that such a supply would be classified as a composite supply with the supply of services being the principal supply. It would be taxable @18% under the heading '9989 Sl. No. 27' of Notification 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate).
19. (2019) 110 TX 233 Maxwell Electrical Engineers (AAR - Karnataka) dated 17-09-2019
Carrying out works in relation to supply, erection, testing, commissioning and transmission of electrical transmission line and transformer for an electrical company which was involved in the business and trading of electricity. It was held that for such composite works contract service rate of tax applicable is 18% since it does not satisfy the condition prescribed in Item No.(vi)(a) of Sl.No.3 of Notification 11/2017 i.e. composite works contract through Government bodies for works other than the use of commerce and industry or any business profession.
20. (2019) 110 TX 255 Toyota Psusho India Pvt. Ltd (AAR - Karnataka) dated 18-09-2019
Persons who have procured goods at concessional rate of 1.0% of GST by utilizing the benefit of Notification 40/2017-Central Tax (Rate) are not eligible to claim refunds of IGST paid on export as per Rule 96(10) with effect from 23-10-2017.
21. [2019] 111 taxmann.com 263 (SC) Technimont Pvt Ltd vs. Punjab
Condition of pre-deposit of 25% of tax as a condition precedent to file appeal is held to be valid. Appellate authority has no power to overwrite the statutory requirement of pre-deposit.
22. (2019) 110 TX 353 Sameera Trading Company (AAR - Karnataka) dated 23-09-2019
Supply of Wind Turbine generator or Windmill with accessories is a composite supply and liable to concessional rate of 5% as per Entry 234 of Schedule I of Notification 1/2017.
23. 2019 112 TX 61 (Karnataka) (HC) Anand Mohan Properties Pvt Ltd vs. Government of India dated 26-09-2019
Authorities restrained from provisionally attaching bank accounts of an assessee without issuing notice under Section-74 or other relevant sections.
24. (2019) 110 TX 481 Royal Care Specialty Hospital Ltd (AAR - Tamil Nadu) dated 26-09-2019
Services to in-patients including supply of rooms, care, diagnostics, medicines, consumables etc. in the course of treatment in the hospital is a composite supply of providing healthcare services classified under SAC 999311. Secondly, it was held that the applicant is not eligible for ITC paid on input services used for exclusively for providing exempt services. Such input services are availed for exempt and taxable supply has to be appropriated as per Rule 42 of the CGST and r/w Section 17(2) of CGST Act.
25. [2019] 109 TX 507 (National Anti-Profiteering Authority) dated 26-09-2019
Gaurav Gulati vs. Paramount Topbuild Pvt. Ltd.
In a complaint filed by one of the customers about not passing the benefit of ITC as per Section 171(1) by the builder, it was held that since it is found that ITC not passed by the builder, an offence was committed under Section 171.
26. (2019) 110 TX 288 - We Work India Management Pvt. Ltd. dated 30-09-19
The query raised herein was in relation to availability of credit and apportionment of the same as per Section-17. It was held that ITC available on inputs procured by the applicant as long as the same does not result into immovable property. Engineered wood with oak top wooden flooring being easily detachable and movable in nature, is eligible on ITC. ITC is not available on detachable and sliding and stacking glass partitions as fixing of the same amounts to an addition or alteration to the immovable property.
27. (2019) 111 TX 456 HP Enterprises India Pvt Ltd (AAR - Karnataka) dated 30-09-2019
Setting up data centre by carrying out various activities leading to erection, fitting out, renovation and commissioning of data centre is held to be a works contract since the contract also involves transfer of property in goods.
28. (2019) 110 TX 426 Arivu Education Consultants Pvt Ltd (AAR - Karnataka) dated 30-09-2019
An applicant engaged in the activity of providing coaching, learning and training services and also collecting certain amount as examination fee from the students and remitting the same to the respective college or university without any profit element is held to be a pure agent for the activity of collecting such an examination fee.
29. (2019) 110 TX 65 (NAA) Mohit Arora vs. Lodha Developer Ltd dated 03-10-2019
A builder not passing the benefit of additional ITC by commiserating deduction in prices amounts to profiteering by the builder which is contravention of Section 171.
30. (2019) 11 TX 134 Children of World India Trust (AAR - Maharashtra) dated 04-10-2019
A Trust which provides educational programme for the homeless children, also facilitates adoption and receive consideration in the form of adoption fee is held to be exempted from GST for the receipt of such adoption fee. These activities are held to be charitable activities which are exempted under Notification 12/2017.
31. (2019) 110 TX 180 VFS Global Services Pvt Ltd (AAR - Maharashtra) dated 04-10-2019
Setting up of Citizen Facilitation Centre as per the contract awarded by MCGM, for which each transaction is chargeable is held to be taxable services since such an activity cannot be classified as function of a Municipality under Article-243 of the Constitution and hence is not exempt as per Sl. Nos. 3 and 3A of Notification 12/2017.
32. (2019) 110 TX 182 - Rotary Club of Mumbai Western Elite (AAR Maharashtra) dated 04-10-2019
Club received membership fee from all its members to fulfil the purpose of meeting its expenditure towards meetings, communication, club annual dues. It was stated that since the books of the applicant clearly showed that the fees so collected is used for purposes other than administrative expense. It was, therefore, held that such fees are collected in lieu of supply of services and hence liable to be taxed under GST.
It was also held that if membership fee is recovered by the Club from the members and spent exclusively for administrative expenses then the same will not be taxable under the GST law.
33. (2019) 110 TX 179 Vertiv Energy Pvt Ltd (AAR-Maharashtra) dated 04-10-2019
Supply, erection, commissioning, installation and testing of UPS system is held to be composite supply of goods and services since according to the contract and the nature of transaction, one can come to a conclusion that it is not a works contract. Since the goods are dispatched much prior to the installation, the predominant element of the transaction is that of supply of goods. Therefore, such a transaction was held to be a composite supply with supply of goods being the principal supply.
34. (2019) 110 TX 184 Jotun India Pvt Ltd (AAR - Maharashtra) dated 04-10-2019
Applicant was not in the business of providing parental medical insurance and such an insurance cover is optional for its employees. Initially, the entire premium is paid by the applicant and subsequently 50% of the premium amount is recovered from the employees. In such a case, it was held that since the applicant is merely recovering a part of the premium due and not in the business of providing insurance, therefore, relying on a similar case of Posco India Pune Processing Centre Pvt Ltd (2019 102 TX 21 AAR - Maharashtra), it was held that such recovery of premium cannot be considered as supply of service.
35. (2019) 112 TX 54 (HC) (Gujarat) - Sitaram Roadways vs. Gujarat dated 10-10-2019
Competent authority had intercepted the conveyance i.e. the truck of the assessee and detailed the same. In the meanwhile, the assessee had paid the tax and penalty on the value the goods. The authority passed a confiscation order before the date of hearing on which the assessee was called and the order did not contain any cogent tangible reason for passing the confiscation order. The Hon'ble Court quashed the order as non-speaking and against the principle of natural justice. The matter was restored back to the authority for fresh consideration and order and the goods and conveyance was to be released forthwith.
36. (2019) 110 TX 341 (NAA) Prashant Nandoola Matam vs. Bhartiya City Developers (P) Ltd dated 14-10-2019
Any builder denied the benefit of ITC to home buyers and profiteering from the same is liable for penalty.
37. (2019) 112 TX 125 (Rajasthan) (HC) Rakesh Kr. Khandelwal vs. UOI
Manager of a firm arrested for wrong claim of ITC by the firm for an offence punishable under Section 132(1)(e) from 20-08-2019. The partners of the firm are already granted protection by the Apex Court and the assessee was in a position to produce tax invoices and E-way bills to prima facie substantiate that the purchases were genuine and their suppliers were in existence. In the above facts and circumstances the Court directed that the Manager of the firm be released on bail.
38. (2020) 115 TX 171 Goa Industrial development Corporation (AAR - Goa) dated 17-10-2019
The applicant entered into an agreement with multiple parties for lease of land but the transaction could not be completed due to public protest. Since such lease of land could not materialize the applicant paid back the original amount along with the compensation. It was held that such a compensation was paid in the course of or furtherance of business and hence is a supply as per Section 7 classifiable as a service under Schedule-II Clause-(e) i.e. 'agreeing to the obligation to refrain from an act, or to tolerate and act at situation, or to do an act'.
39. (2019) 110 TX 408 (AAR - West Bengal) - Shewratan Co Pvt Ltd dated 21-10-2019
Supply of ship stores to foreign going vessel lodged at Indian ports held to be local supply and not a zero-rated supply unless it is marked specifically for a location outside India.
40. (2019) 111 TX 482 (Gujarat) (HC) - Paresh Nathalal Chauhan vs. Gujarat dated 25-10-2019
GST authorities conducting search at the premises as per Section-67(2) of the GST Act had seized all the goods articles and documents and yet continued to stay in the premises of the assessee with male and female officers throughout the day and night. Such an action was held to be excessive, carried out without any authority of law and was abuse of power.
41. (2020) 113 TX 58 (AAR - Tamil Nadu) - Kalyan Jewellers India Ltd
Prepaid instrument (PPI) offered by a jewellery store engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of jewellery products. It was held that such PPIs are regarded to be as vouchers as defined under the CGST Act and the same falls within the meaning of supply and hence liable to tax.
42. (2019) 112 TX 376 (Madras) (HC) - VN Mehta & Co. vs Chennai dated 08-11-2019
The department initiated proceedings for recovery of tax under Section 79 r/w Section 83, without assessing the dealer. They also issued a notice to the Bank Manager to recover certain sums from the account of the assessee as dues recoverable by the department. It was held that no such recovery is possible without assessment and quantification of dues by the department and hence such a recovery action is held to be not maintainable.
43. (2019) 111 TX 525 Newtramax Healthcare (AAR - Himachal Pradesh) dated 15-11-2019
With vitamins and minerals Protein Powder manufactured by the applicant having labels as per Drugs & Cosmetic Act can be classified under HS Code 3004 as medicaments (excluding goods of heading 3002, 3005 or 3006 consisting of mixed products for therapeutic or prophylactic use.
44. (2019) 111 TX 81 (SC) - UP vs. Kay Pan Fragrance Pvt Ltd
The Hon'ble Apex Court quashed an interim order by Allahabad High Court wherein the High Court had directed the release of seized goods subject to deposit of security other than cash or bank guarantee or in the alternative an indemnity bond equivalent to value of tax and penalty. The Hon'ble Apex Court while quashing the order held that the High Court cannot lay down guidelines contrary to Section-67(6).
45. (2019) 112 TX 156 (AAAR - West Bengal) Ashis Ghosh dated 21-11-2019
The appellate authority upheld the decision of the AAR authority which held that the contract by the appellant for filling in compound, tank, low land etc. with silver sand and earthwork layers, including spreading and contacting the same, is not a supply of goods but a transfer of property in goods in the course of preparation of the site and hence to be classified as Works Contract.
46. (2020) 113 TX 59 (AAR - Tamil Nadu) - RB Shah India Enterprises dated 25-11-2019
The services by CHA offering services such as Custom and DGSD compliances along with contract of duty credit scrips facilitation, document preparation in relation to Bill of Entry, document management system, refund of additional duties from Customs etc. to be regarded as a case of mixed supply as per under Section-2(30).
47. (2020) 113 TX 434 (Kerala) (HC) - Polycab India Ltd dated 26-11-2019
For a transaction involving a sale by a vendor in Gujarat to the purchaser at Uttarakhand and further consigned to Kerala as per instruction of the purchaser, it was held that the Kerala authorities cannot detain the goods under the pretext of evasion of IGST. The Hon'ble High Court held that as long as documents like invoice or e-way bill are available on record, possible evasion of IGST in Kerala by the unregistered dealer was not a valid reason for detention of goods. Detention of goods was lifted.
48. (2019) 110 TX 288 (AAR - Maharashtra) 03-12-2019 Sir JJ College of Architecture Consultancy Cell dated 03-12-2019
Rectification of Advance Ruling Order beyond statutory limit of six months is barred by limitation and hence cannot be condoned.
49. (2020) 114 TX 187 (SC) Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd. dated 04-12-2019
Charter party agreement with the Port Trust wherein the services of the tug boat along with the master and other personnel were assigned to the Port Trust for six months. Such agreements amounted to a deemed sale as the effective use and control was transferred to the Port Trust.
50. (2020) 113 TX 98 (AAAR - West Bengal) - East Hooghly Agro Plantation Pvt Ltd dated 23-12-2019
High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) woven fabrics coated with LDPE melt cannot be classified as textile fabric and tarpaulins made from the same laminated fabric cannot be classified under heading 6306, 6301, 5903.
51. (2020) 114 TX 1 (AAR Tamil Nadu) -Papaca Herbs & Spices Ltd dated 23-12-2019
Natural Fibre Composite Board (NFC) is made of natural fibre i.e. rice-husk and is classifiable under heading no.41193 and taxable at 12%.
52. (2019) 110 TX 396 Durga Projects Infra Pvt Ltd (AAAR - Karnataka) dated 24-12-2019
It was held that authority has no power to condone the delay of 77 days in filing appeal against the AAR order, by the appellant.
53. (2020) 113 TX 365 (AAR - Maharashtra) Chowgule Industry Pvt Ltd dated 26-12-2019
An authorized dealer of motor vehicles is entitled to avail ITC on the purchase of a demo car. It was reasoned that such a demo car is purchased in the course of business of selling such cars and hence is eligible to take ITC on such cars (capital goods).
54. (2020) 11 TX 476 (Gujarat) (HC) - Sureshbhai Gadecha vs. Gujarat dated 27-12-19
The question before the Hon'ble Court was whether investigation on the same subject matter can be initiated by two separate authorities i.e. CGST and SGST. As an interim relief, the Court also restrained the authorities to taking any coercive measures pursuant to such an inquiry proceedings and admitted the Petition.
55. (2020)115 TX 186 (AAR - Madhya Pradesh) Vippy Industries Ltd dated 02-01-2020
Bioprocessed meal made by manufacturer of soya based product for general public, animal feed and industrial use cannot be classified as preparation of a kind use in animal feeding, since no evidence was provided to prove the same. It was held that chapter heading 2309 9090 is exclusively meant for animal feed and hence the applicant is not entitled for NIL rate of tax.
56. (2020) 114 TX 447 (Madras) (HC) - Refex Industries Ltd dated 06-01-2020
Levy of interest on belated payment would apply to tax paid in cash belatedly after adjusting the input tax credit due to the assessee. This was further explained by stating that the ITC is as good as tax which is available with the department to the credit of the assessee. It was also held the inserted proviso to Section-50(1) was clarificatory in nature.
57. (2020) 113 TX 370 (AAR - Karnataka) - SLN Ex-Fabs (Bengaluru) Pvt Ltd. -dated 07-01-2010
Services of fabrication of truck and bus body building are to be considered as services covered under heading 9988 as manufacturing services on physical inputs (goods owned by others) in terms of serial no. 26(ii) of Notification 11/2017 and subsequently under 26(iii)/(iv) after the amendment.
58. (2020) 114 TX 239 (AAR - Maharashtra) Vilas Chandanmal Gandhi dated 15-01-2020
GST is leviable on the sale of TDR/FSI received as consideration for surrendering the joint rights in terms of development control regulation granted in light of agreement entered into between the applicant and the PMC. GST is payable as a service and is to be classified under heading 9972.
59. (2020) 115 TX 89 (Gujarat) (HC) - Sahitya Mudranalaya Pvt Ltd dated 29-01-2020
This judgment is under the Service Tax regime but has significant bearing on the GST regime as well. The Hon'ble High Court has held that providing services of transportation i.e. providing vehicles to State Boards/Universities for conduct of State examinations will be exempt from Service Tax since imparting education services by an educational institution is exempt as per clause OA of Entry-2 of Mega Exemption Notification No. 25/2012 - ST.
60. (2020) 115 TX 99 (AAR - Tamil Nadu) - Automotive Components Technology India Pvt Ltd dated 31-01-2020
Transfer of title of moulds supplied by a foreign supplier to an Indian entity which is further supplied to a final Indian buyer for a consideration, is a supply in the course of business and is classifiable as supply of goods.
61. (2020) 115 TX 82 (Kerala) (HC) - 03-02-2020 - Sutherland Mortgage Services Inc.
In a writ petition against the preliminary rejection of AAR, wherein an Indian company sought Advance Ruling with regards to whether supply of service by an Indian branch to customer located outside India would constitute to be an export of services. The AAR authorities rejected the application on the ground that Section-97(2) is does not allow determination of place of supply and therefore the same cannot be entertained. In the Writ, it was held by the Hon'ble Court that although determination of place of supply is not specifically enumerated in 97(2) the question falls within the ambit of the larger issue i.e. 'determination of liability' to pay tax on any goods or services or both as envisaged in 97(2)(e).
62. (2020) 114 TX 740 (AAAR - HP) - Nepa Plantation Ltd - dated 12-02-2020
No penalty is leviable for sending of the machine to a place from another place for the purposes of repair.
63. (2020) 115 TX 63 (AAR - Karnataka) - Macro Media Digital Imaging Pvt Ltd dated 17-02-2020
Printing of content provided by the customer on PVC manners and supply of such printed trade advertisement material is a supply of service.
64. (2020) 115 TX 130 (AAR - West Bengal) - Swapna Printing Works Pvt Ltd dated 16-03-2020
Composite printing services provided by the applicant to an Indian entity as per the instruction of a foreign entity cannot be classified as an export of services. It is a local supply.
65. (2020) 116 TX 14 (AAR Rajasthan) Clay Craft India Pvt Ltd
The moot question decided by the Authorities was that Directors regardless of their contractual or pecuniary arrangement with the companies, are not employees of the company and hence not covered by the exception in Sch III. Any remuneration to the directors will be liable to GST through RCM. They also relied on Alcon Consulting Engineers India Pvt Ltd. (2019) 110 TX 357 (AAR Karnataka).
❑❑
