-
Rice in its natural form with its essential characteristics remaining intact is classified in Chapter 10. FRK is not covered in the said chapter as essential characteristics and property of rice is changed from granule to flour.
In the matter of JVS Foods Pvt Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3507 (AAR)
-
Sl. No. 23 of Schedule III of Notification No. 1/2017- State Tax (Rate) which covers Food preparations not elsewhere specified or included (Other than items such as roasted gram, sweetmeats, batters including idli/dosa batter, namkeens,etc.) and falls under Heading 2106 is applicable to Fried Fryums.
In the matter of Alisha Foods
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3506 (AAR)
-
Though the Revenue clarified that the press release itself was a mistake having not decision to extend the time limit till December 31, 2017, the assessee cannot be deprived of the substantive benefit under the GST Act merely on account of a technical lapse insisted upon by the Revenue.
A.F. Babu vs. Union of India
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3505 (HC-KERALA)
-
Merely because two views are possible, a court sitting in judicial review shall not exercise its discretion in favour of an alternative view to that of the authority while finding no palpable infirmity in the classification of the product in the order passed by the Appellate Authority.
Dabur India Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of CGST, Ghaziabad and 4 Others
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3503 (HC-ALLAHABAD)
-
No tax is leviable under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, on the ocean freight for the services provided by a person located in a non-taxable territory by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India upto the customs station of clearance in India.
Mohit Mineral Pvt. Ltd. vs UOI
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3502 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Rule 159(1) states that when the Commissioner decides to attach any property including the bank account, he shall pass an order in form GST DRC-22. Form GST DRC-22 lays down the format in which the order has to be issued provisionally attaching the property and the communication thereof to the financial institution.
Kaish Impex Private Limited vs. The Union of India & Ors.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3501 (HC-BOMBAY)
-
Filters cannot be considered as Parts of railway locomotives and therefore, cannot be classified under Chapter Heading 86.07.
In the matter of Parker Hannifin India Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3498 (AAR)
-
The correct way to read the entry Sl. No. 80 of Schedule II would be all diagnostic kits and all reagents and to limit the term reagents in the rate Notification as being applicable only to diagnostic reagents is an incorrect interpretation. Use of the word reagents in the entry Sl. No. 80 of Schedule II should be understood as a generic word encompassing all the reagents mentioned under Heading 3822 of the Customs Tariff.
In the matter of Chromachemie Laboratory Private Limited
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3497 (AAR)
-
The Corrigendum Letter dated September 24, 2019 was issued by the Superintending Engineer (T & C), RRVPNL, Cittorgarh specifying that GST @18% applicable on cost of Infrastructure for Value of Supply. After issuance of said corrigendum, the question raised by the applicant turned redundant and therefore no advance ruling is required to be given.
In the matter of SLN Tech-Fabs (Bengaluru) Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3494 (AAR)
-
The Corrigendum Letter dated September 24, 2019 was issued by the Superintending Engineer (T & C), RRVPNL, Cittorgarh specifying that GST @18% applicable on cost of Infrastructure for Value of Supply. After issuance of said corrigendum, the question raised by the applicant turned redundant and therefore no advance ruling is required to be given.
In the matter of Wonder Cement Limited
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3493 (AAR)
-
The section 16(1) of CGST Act, 2017 does not make any distinction between capital goods and other goods for allowing credit of ITC. Hence, ITC in respect of capital goods, is available and can be taken, since ITC credit for capital goods is in parity with other goods.
In the matter of Chowgule Industries Private Limited
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3492 (AAR)
-
There is nothing on the record of this case to show that the petitioner Company had not acted bona fidely, particularly in view of the fact that the transaction relates to the early stages in which the GST regime had been implemented, and there might be some confusion prevailing at that initial stage. In that view of the matter, we do not find any plausible reason whatsoever, to deny the petitioner Company the benefit of the provisions of Section 77 (1) of the CGST Act, read with Section 19(2) of the IGST Act.
Shree Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd.vs. The Union of India
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3491 (HC-JHARKHAND)
-
Questions relating to requirement of GST registration in another state is beyond advance ruling jurisdiction.
In the matter of T & D Electricals
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3487 (AAR)
-
The rate of GST on fee collected for entry into Municipal Park, ticket charges for Toy Train Facility and ticket charges for Pedal Boat facility is 18%.
In the matter of Chandmal Narayandas Consortium
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3486 (AAR)
-
Rate applicable to principal supply will also be applicable to common amenities which form part of overall construction service while clarifying that construction services including common areas and amenities on pro-rata basis performed by applicant in respect of dwelling units exceeding 60 sq. mts. would be liable to full rate of GST i.e. 18%.
In the matter of Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3485 (AAR)
-
Applicant has agreed to do an act of vacating claim by parties of setting up SEZ units for which GIDC has paid consideration. The original amount paid back along with compensation would therefore qualify as supply of services.
In the matter of Goa Industrial Development Corporation
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3484 (AAR)
-
There are many larger issues, which have been raised for the purpose of adjudication of this Court. There is a strong case to pass an interim order for release of goods and vehicle subject to payment of tax and furnishing of bank guarantee for the penalty amount.
ABB India Ltd. vs. UOI
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3483 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Notice is issued in writ challenging denial of ITC to a buyer, for non-payment of tax charged by the supplier to the Government.
LGW Industries Limited & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3480 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
HO being distinct person in the eyes of law and the transaction is in the course of furtherance of business, the supply is taxable supply for which HO has adopted a value agreed under the Pricing clause of the MOU and paid the tax on the value declared in the invoice.
In the matter of M/s. Sanghvi Movers Limited
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3479 (AAR)
-
When distinct person is eligible for full ITC and is going to make further supply, then, in respect of initial supply, it is not necessary to adopt only OMV and pay higher tax and block such tax amounts.
In the matter of Specsmakers Opticians Private limited
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3478 (AAR)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.