Supreme Court Summarises Principles For Interpreting Tax Statutes In Judgment On GST Input Tax Credit

The Supreme Court on Thursday (October 3) outlined the principles governing the interpretation of taxation statutes in the context of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol summarised the principles of interpretation while dealing with a case involving the interpretation of Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act, which disallows Input Tax Credit (ITC) on goods and services used in the construction of immovable property, except for...

GST Input Tax Credit On Construction Costs Can Be Claimed If Building Construction Was Necessary For Renting Out Service : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday (October 3) held that if construction of a building is essential for supplying services such as renting out, it could fall into the "plant" exception to section 17(5)(d) of CGST Act which provides that Input Tax Credit cannot be claimed for construction material (other than plant or machinery) for immovable property construction. “If the construction of a building was essential for carrying out activity of supplying services such as renting or giving on lease or...

Payment To Non-Employed Director As Sitting Fees Is Not Salary, Hence Liable To Service Tax: CESTAT

The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the payment made to a non-employed director as director's sitting fees is not in the nature of salary; hence, the director's fees are liable to the levy of Service Tax.The Bench consists of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member), considered the issue of whether the assessee is liable to pay Service Tax under reverse charge mechanism on the Directors remuneration paid to the...

Show Cause Notice U/s 37C Of Central Excise Act Issued At Wrong Address Cannot Be Proceeded: Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court recently held that the recourse to Sub-Clauses (b) & (c) of Clause 37C (1) of the Central Excise Act, is not permitted if the show cause notice was not sent at the proper address of the registered taxpayer.The High Court also clarified that Sub-Clause (b) and Sub-Clause (c) of Section 37(C)(1) of the Act of 1944 can only be pressed into service, if the service of notice under Sub-Clause (a) cannot be affected.As per Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, any...

Assessee Entitled To Cash Refund Of Accumulated CENVAT Credit Despite Abolition Of Education Cess: CESTAT

The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that merely because levy of education cess was abolished does not disqualify an assessee from availing Cenvat Credit on Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess.The Bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and C L Mahar (Technical Member) has observed that “the abolition of Education Cess does not affect the accumulated Cenvat credit which was availed during the time when the Cenvat...

'Cheeselings' By Parle-G Classified As 'Namkeen', Exempt From Excise Duty: CESTAT

The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that 'Cheeselings' by Parle-G is 'namkeen' which is exempted from the excise duty under S. No. 29 of the Notification No. 3/2006-Central Excise dated 1st March 2006. The Bench of C J Mathew (Technical Member) and Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) has observed that “'Namkeen' has not been defined either contextually in the notification or as a separate nomenclature in the tariff. Therefore, the...

Second Provisional Attachment Notice Lacking Fresh Reasons Is Arbitrary: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court stated that issuing a second provisional attachment notice without providing new or fresh reasons is considered arbitrary. The Division Bench of Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Manjive Shukla observed that “the department cannot be allowed simpliciter to issue a second notice, and thereafter, third and fourth and continue with the provisional attachment for four to five years without giving any fresh reason for the said provisional attachment. If the same was...

Service Charge Collected By Medical Store In Hospital Covered Under “Health Care Services”, Exempted From Service Tax: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that service charge collected by a medical store in the hospital is covered under “Health Care Services” and are exempted from Service Tax. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) has observed that “medical aid to the patients who are admitted in the hospital, most of the time requires urgent care and treatment without any loss of time and that is the reason for having a medical store...

Goods Already Exported Before New Notification; Conditions Mentioned Are Not Relevant For Denying Refund: CESTAT

The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that since the refund claim is for exports which had already taken place before the new notification, the requirement to submit returns (as mentioned in the new notification) does not apply and cannot be used as a reason to deny the refund. The Bench of M.M. Parthiban (Technical Member) has observed that “taxes and duties should not be exported, to enable a level playing field in the ...

Local Commissioner's Report Establishing Supplier's Existence Is Sufficient: CESTAT Grants CENVAT Credit To Assessee

The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the report of the Local Commissioner, which establishes the existence of the supplier, is sufficient to grant CENVAT credit to the assessee. The Bench of M.M. Parthiban (Technical Member) has observed that “the affidavit duly bearing the stamp of the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), and submitted by an independent local Commissioner appointed by the Civil Court Judge, Ludhiana, is independent...

Factory Closed Due To Unavoidable Circumstances Not Liable For Excise Duty: CESTAT

The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that if a factory is closed due to unavoidable circumstances, it is not liable to pay excise duty. The Bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) has observed that “the closure of the factory was not on the choice of the assessee whereas, they were compelled to keep the factory closed as per the direction of the Gujarat Pollution Control Board. Therefore, closing of the...

Payments Made During Investigation Without SCN Do Not Constitute Payments Against Demand: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the payment made by the assessee during an investigation, without any Show Cause Notice, cannot be considered as payment against a demand raised by the Department without even going into the merits of the nature of demand. The Bench of Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) has observed that “any amount received during investigation is Revenue Deposit hence cannot be retained for want of...