Normal tax procedures are not practical or cost-effective to small suppliers of goods and services. For such small suppliers, GST law provides for composition levy scheme under Section 10 of the CGST Act. Such schemes are devised for procedural ease to small suppliers and administrative convenience. To help ease the implementation and tax compliance process for small suppliers, such schemes are devised.
With effect from 01.04.2019, various changes are being implemented in the composition scheme. As the scheme is required to be opted, this article is an attempt to explain the provision as it shall be applicable with effect from 01.04.2019 for composition dealers.
Nature of Composition Levy:
Composition levy is a tax, which is levied in lieu of the taxes required to be paid under normal procedure. It is not an exemption of tax or exemption scheme. Examining a similar scheme, the Supreme Court held in Voltas Limited v. State of Gujrat [(2015) 7 SCC 527: (2015) 80 VST 12 (SC)],
“A plain perusal thereof would attest that thereby, in the circumstances to be prescribed, a dealer can be left at his option to pay in lieu of the amount of tax payable, a lump sum by way of composition, at the rate or rates as may be fixed by the State Government having regard to the incidence of tax on the nature of the goods involved.”
A rule of equal importance is that laws relating to economic activities should be viewed with greater latitude than laws touching civil rights such as freedom of speech, religion etc. It has been said by no less a person than Holmes, J., that the legislature should be allowed some play in the joints, because it has to deal with complex problems which do not admit of solution through any doctrinaire or strait-jacket formula and this is particularly true in case of legislation dealing with economic matters, where, having regard to the nature of the problems required to be dealt with, greater play in the joints has to be allowed to the legislature. The court should feel more inclined to give judicial deference to legislative judgment in the field of economic regulation than in other areas where fundamental human rights are involved.
Legislatures are given wider amplitude in economic legislations. Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held in R.K. Garg v. Union of India [1981 (4) S.C.C.675],
“Law relating to economic activities should be viewed with greater latitude than laws touching civil rights such as freedom of speech, religion etc. It has been said by no less a person than Holmes, J., that the legislature should be allowed some play in the joints, because it has to deal with complex problems which do not admit of solution through any doctrinaire or straight jacket formula and this is particularly true in case of legislation dealing with economic matters, where, having regard to the nature of the problems required to be dealt with, greater play in the joints has to be allowed to the legislature. The Court should feel more inclined to give judicial deference to legislative judgment in the field of economic regulation than in other areas where fundamental human rights are involved…..The Court must always remember that `legislation is directed to practical problems, that the economic mechanisms is highly sensitive and complex, that many problems are singular and contingent, that laws are not abstract propositions and do not relate to abstract units and are not to be measured by abstract symmetry’ that exact wisdom and nice adaptation of remedy are not always possible and that `judgment is largely a prophecy based on meagre and uninterpreted experience’. Every legislation particularly in economic matters is essentially empiric and it is based on experimentation or what one may call trial and error method and therefore it cannot provide for all possible situations or anticipate all possible abuses. There may be crudities and inequities in complicated experimental economic legislation but on that account alone it cannot be struck down as invalid. If any crudities, inequities or possibilities of abuse come to light the legislature can always step in and enact suitable amendatory legislation.”
Read more at composition scheme under gst.
The composition of tax is nothing but an alternative route to assessment regulated by the terms of a contract between the assessee and the assessing authority to arrive at the same destination. Therefore, the dealer who had voluntarily and with full knowledge of features of alternate method of taxation has opted to be governed by it, a fortiori cannot in the lean season, claim for his assessment to be made under the regular assessment in the same assessment year. In the instant case, the appellant had voluntarily offered to pay the tax at the compounded rates and since it was accepted by the assessing authority, in our opinion, in the middle of the year the assessee could not have withdrawn the application for payment of the tax at the compounded rates. This has been taken note of by the assessing authority and the first appellate authority and by the High Court.
Composition Scheme is Optional:
Section 10 of the CGST Act provides for composition scheme. Section 10 of the CGST Act used the term- “may opt to pay, in lieu of tax payable by him”. Thus, the composition levy is optional. A person may decide not to opt the scheme even if he is eligible to avail the scheme. Further if a person opts the scheme at one place, all the registered persons operating upon the same permanent account number has to opt the scheme.
Once such scheme is opted, later the registered person cannot claim assessment under normal procedure. In taxation measures composition schemes are not unknown and when such scheme is availed of by the assessee it is not at all permissible for him to turn around and ask for regular assessment –Commissioner v. Venus Casting Pvt. Ltd. [2000 (117) E.L.T. 273 (S.C.): AIR 2000 SC 1568: (2000) 4 SCC 206]. The Composition Scheme being optional, having opted for it, appellant has no locus standi to revert back to work out the gross value charged for the services rendered –Sunraj Construction v. Commissioner of Central Excise [2016 (42) S.T.R. 395 (Tri. – Mumbai)]. In this case it was held that entitlement to benefits of composition scheme arises only after exercise of option as per rules. Once an assessee opts for composition levy, he is not entitled to claim any other exemptions. In CCE v. Venus Castings Limited [2000(4) SCC 206: AIR 2000 SC 1568: (2000) 4 SCC 206], Hon’ble Supreme Court held that once an assessee opts for compounded levy scheme, he cannot claim relief in respect to redetermination of actual production and duty liability under normal procedure. As assesse can opt out in subsequent period as permitted by the provisions but a hybrid structure is not permitted. The judgment is in case of compounded levy scheme under Central Excise Law, but the principles shall be squarely applicable in composition levy.
The scheme is optional, and as assessee has option to pay tax under normal procedure or to opt for composition scheme if he is eligible for that. Once the scheme is opted, the assessee cannot claim assessment under normal procedure. The Supreme Court held in Koothattukulam Liquors v. CST, [(2015) 12 SCC 794: (2014) 72 VST 353 (SC)],
“Therefore, the dealer having once exercised its option under the composition scheme cannot, therefore be permitted to turn around and rescind from its liability merely on the ground that he had no turnover due to losses or had not done any manufacturing activity during the relevant year only for the reason that amount payable under the composition scheme is not relatable to any annual turnover but depends upon the agreement under the scheme at the option of the dealer. In other words, the assessee once having opted for composition and upon the completion of assessment cannot blow hot and cold at the same time, requesting the assessment authority for regular assessment under the Act.”
Once the scheme is opted, actual duty liability under normal procedure is not relevant as held in Union of India v. Supreme Mills General Mills [2001 (133) E.L.T. 513 (S.C.): (2000) 9 SCC 645], Affirmed in 2003 (158) ELT A272 (Supreme Court)
Option must be exercised:
Exercise of option is mandatory. Benefit of composition scheme cannot be availed unless the option is exercised as per the prescribed procedure. Examining a similar provision under service tax law, it was held in Nagarjuna Construction Company v. Union of India [2010 (19) S.T.R. 321 (A.P.)], Affirmed in 2012 (28) STR 561 (Supreme Court) : (2013) 1 SCC 721],
“On a true and fair construction of Rule 3(3) of the 2007 Rules, it is clear that where in respect of a works contract service tax has been paid, no option to pay service tax under the composition scheme could be exercised. There is no ambiguity in this provision. The entitlement to avail the benefits of the composition scheme is only after an option is exercised and this provision specifically enjoins a disqualification for exercise of such option where service tax had been paid in respect of a works contract. To put it succinctly, where service tax has been paid in respect of a works contract, the eligibility to exercise an option to avail the benefits of the composition scheme under the 2007 Rules is excluded.”
The expression ‘opts to pay service tax under these rules’ cannot be construed and mean the filing of the return and the payment would sufficiently constitute the exercise of option under composite scheme. An option was exercised prior to 26-3-2008 by payment of the service tax under composite scheme. The authorities have proceeded that since the option was exercised for the first time on 26-3-2008 the petitioner cannot claim that he would still be liable to pay the tax under the said composite scheme. The Court found substance in the submission that the change in a rate of tax subsequent to exercising an option under the said composite scheme cannot operate retrospectively as the rule of the game cannot be changed once it is played- Larsen and Toubro Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax [2017 (7) G.S.T.L. 41 (Cal.)].
Constitutionality of such simplified procedure:
In State of Kerala v. Builders Association of India [(1997) 2 SCC 183], while upholding Constitutionality of such simplified tax procedures, Hon’ble Supreme Court held,
“Simplified and hassle-free method of assessment of tax payable, making it optional for the assessee. It is only that they follow a different route to arrive at the same destination. Several taxing enactments contain provisions for composition of tax liability which may sometimes be in the interest of both the Revenue and the assessee. It must also be remembered that in the field of taxation, the legislature must be allowed greater `play in the joints’, as it is called. Allowance must also be made for “trial and error” by the legislature.”
Vide 2018 amendment in the GCGST Act [effective from 01.02.2019], upper limit of turnover for opting for composition scheme has been raised from Rs. 1 crore to Rs. 1.5 crore. Further composition dealers to be allowed to supply services, for up to a value not exceeding 10% of turnover in the preceding financial year, or Rs. 5 lakhs, whichever is higher. This will make a large number of MSMEs eligible for the composition scheme.
Section 10 of the CGST Act starts with non-obstante clause, “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act”. A non-obstante clause is generally appended to a section with a view to give the enacting part of the section, in case of conflict, an overriding effect over the provision in the same or other Act mentioned in the non-obstante clause. It is equivalent to saying that in spite of the provisions of the Act mentioned in the non-obstante clause, the provision following it will have its full operation or the provisions embraced in the non-obstante clause will not be an impediment for the operation of the enactment or the provision in which the non-obstante clause occurs. Thus, when provision of section 10 is applied, other contrary provisions of the Act are not applicable.
Reverse Charge Liability:
Section 10 is subject to the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 9 of the CGST Act. Section 9(3) of the CGST Act refers to goods or services or both on which the tax shall be paid on reverse charge basis by the recipient of such goods or services or both, and all the provisions of this Act shall apply to such recipient as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both. Further section 9(4) provides that the central tax in respect of the supply of taxable goods or services or both by a supplier, who is not registered, to a registered person shall be paid by such person on reverse charge basis as the recipient and all the provisions of this Act shall apply to such recipient as if he is the person liable for paying the tax in relation to the supply of such goods or services or both.
It means that a person opting for composition scheme is liable to pay GST on reverse charge method, if applicable on any of its inward supplies. Further, as the person opting for composition scheme is a registered person, whenever it receives any supply from an unregistered person, GST is required to be paid on such receipt of supply under reverse charge method. A person opting for composition scheme is required to pay GST on inward supplies at normal rate if payable on reverse charge method under section 9(3) of the Act, or when received from unregistered dealer under section 9(4) of the CGST Act.
Conditions for availing composition scheme:
As per Section 10(2) of the CGST Act, registered person can opt for composition levy if following conditions are satisfied;
(i) He is not engaged in supply of any service except composite supply of food and beverages and as provided in Section 10(1) of the CGST Act [10% of the value of supply or 5 lakhs rupees, whichever is higher].
(ii) He is not engaged in making any supply of goods which are not leviable to tax under this Act. This condition means that if a registered person is engaged in supply of something not leviable to tax under CGST Act, he shall not be eligible for this scheme. “Not leviable to tax” under this Act does not mean mere exempted goods. It refers to goods which cannot be taxed under this Act. Thus, a person who is engaged in supply of alcoholic liquor for human consumption or a restaurant serving alcoholic liquor cannot opt for this scheme.
However, it has been clarified that if a person supplies goods and/or services referred to in clause (b) of paragraph 6 of Schedule II [restaurant service] and also supplies any exempt services including services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances in so far as the consideration is represented by way of interest or discount, the said person shall not be ineligible for the composition scheme under section 10 subject to the fulfilment of all other conditions specified therein. It has also been clarified that in computing his aggregate turnover in order to determine his eligibility for composition scheme, value of supply of any exempt services including services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances in so far as the consideration is represented by way of interest or discount, shall not be taken into account [C.B.E. & C. Order No. 1/2017-C.T., dated 13-10-2017].
The condition is unnecessary and likely to raise unnecessary disputes. Every person is engaged in numerous activities not leviable to tax under GST provisions. He may supply goods or services without consideration, not leviable to tax under GST. He may sell his land or property not leviable to tax. Why should GST administration be worried about activities not leviable to tax under GST?
(iii) He is not engaged in making any inter-state outward supply of goods. Thus, there is no restrictions on inter-state supply of services.
(iv) He is not engaged in making any supply of goods through an electronic commerce operator who is required to collect tax at source under Section 52 of the Act.
(v) He is not a manufacturer of such goods as may be notified by the Government on the recommendation of the GST council.
Where more than one registered person is having the same Permanent Account Number issued under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the registered person shall not be eligible to opt for the composition scheme unless all such registered persons are eligible under composition scheme and opt to pay tax under the scheme.
Under Rule 5 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, following further conditions have been imposed;
“Conditions and restrictions for composition levy:-
(1) The person exercising the option to pay tax under section 10 shall comply with the following conditions, namely:-
(a) he is neither a casual taxable person nor a non-resident taxable person;
(b) the goods held in stock by him on the appointed day have not been purchased in the course of inter-State trade or commerce or imported from a place outside India or received from his branch situated outside the State or from his agent or principal outside the State, where the option is exercised by a dealer migrating to GST scheme starting from appointed day;
(c) the goods held in stock by him have not been purchased from an unregistered supplier and where purchased, he pays the tax under sub-section (4) of section 9;
(d) he shall pay tax under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) of section 9 on inward supply of goods or services or both;
(e) he was not engaged in the manufacture of goods as notified under clause (e) of sub-section (2) of section 10, during the preceding financial year;
(f) he shall mention the words “composition taxable person, not eligible to collect tax on supplies” at the top of the bill of supply issued by him; and
(g) he shall mention the words “composition taxable person” on every notice or signboard displayed at a prominent place at his principal place of business and at every additional place or places of business.”
A casual taxable person, or a non-resident taxable person is not eligible for composition scheme.
Composition scheme can be opted on the condition that goods held in stock by the person opting for the scheme on the appointed day has not been purchased in course of inter-state trade, or imported from outside India. Further goods held in stock has not been purchased from unregistered dealer.
A person eligible for composition scheme also supplying exempt services including services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances in so far as the consideration is represented by way of interest or discount, would not become ineligible for the composition scheme. Further, for computing the aggregate turnover for eligibility for the scheme, the turnover of exempted services, including services by way of extending deposits, loans or advances in so far as the consideration is represented by way of interest or discount, supplied by a taxpayer will not be included.
Decisions Taken by GST Council:
The GST Council in the 32nd meeting held on 10th January, 2019 at New Delhi took following decisions to give relief to MSME (including small traders), and took following other decisions –
(i) The limit of annual turnover in the preceding financial year for availing composition scheme for goods shall be increased to Rs. 1.5 crore. Special category States would decide, within one week, about the composition limit in their respective States.
(ii) The compliance under composition scheme shall be simplified as now they would need to file one annual return but payment of taxes would remain quarterly (along with a simple declaration).
(iii) A composition scheme shall be made available for suppliers of services (or mixed suppliers) with a tax rate of 6% (3% CGST + 3% SGST) having an annual turnover in preceding financial year upto Rs. 50 lakhs. The said scheme shall be applicable to both service providers as well as suppliers of goods and services, who are not eligible for the presently available composition scheme for goods. They would be liable to file one annual return with quarterly payment of taxes (along with a simple declaration).
For more information, Click at Composition SchemeUnder GST
Composition Scheme as applicable from 01.04.2019:
Two notifications have been issued for composition scheme- one for supplier of goods and other for supplier of services.
Supplier of Goods:
For supplier of goods the relevant notification is 8/2017 as amended. The benefit is available to the suppliers whose aggregate turnover was one crore and fifty lakhs rupees in the preceding financial year as amended by the Notification Notification No. 14/2019 – Central Tax New Delhi, the 7th March, 2019. The limits for special category states [(i) Arunachal Pradesh (ii) Uttarakhand (iii) Manipur (iv) Meghalaya (v) Mizoram (vi) Nagaland (vii) Sikkim (viii) Tripura] remains 75 lakhs.
It may be noted that till 2018-19, Himachal Pradesh and Assam was in the special category states which is not there in the notification 14/2019 and hence registered persons registered in Himachal Pradesh can take benefit upto the turnover of 150 lakhs. Uttarakhand was not there in special category state upto the financial year 2018-19 and benefit upto the full limit [one crore] was available there under composition scheme. In the present notification, the limit has been reduced to 75 lakhs in Uttarakhand.
The suppliers of goods are allowed to supply services upto the limit of 10% of the turnover or Rs. 5 lakhs, whichever is more.
Manufacturer of following items are not eligible for composition levy;
(a) Ice cream and other edible ice, whether or not containing cocoa falling under Tariff entry 2105 00 00.
(b) Pan Masala falling under Tariff entry 2106 90 20.
(c) Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes falling under Chapter 24.
It may be noted that only manufacturers of above said goods have been denied the benefit of composition levy. Traders or services providers related to those goods can avail composition scheme.
Rate of tax has been prescribed under Rule 7 of the CGST Rules [Notification No. 05/2019 – Central Tax New Delhi, the 29th January, 2019], which is 0.5% on goods and 2.5% for restaurants. If services are supplied within the limits allowed in Section 10, such services shall attract a tax rate of 0.5%.
Section 10 of the CGST Act do not provide for composition scheme for supply of services. Thus, benefit to supplier of services has been provided through an exemption notification Notification No. 2/2019-Central Tax (Rate) New Delhi, the 7th March, 2019. It may be noted that it is not a composition scheme and hence the supplier is not required to follow procedures related to composition scheme.
The exemption notification exempts intra-state supplies of goods or services or both, by a registered person of more than 3%. It means that the supplier availing this exemption are required to pay GST at the rate of 6% [3% plus 3%]. The notification can be availed if following conditions are satisfied:-
1.Supplies are made by a registered person, –
(i) whose aggregate turnover in the preceding financial year was fifty lakh rupees or below;
(ii) who is not eligible to pay tax under sub-section (1) of section 10 of the said Act;
Thus, a person who is eligible to pay tax under composition scheme cannot avail this exemption.
(iii) who is not engaged in making any supply which is not leviable to tax under the said Act;
(iv) who is not engaged in making any inter-State outward supply;
Thus, the exemption is available only to those persons who are making exclusively intra-state supplies.
(v) who is neither a casual taxable person nor a non-resident taxable person;
(vi) who is not engaged in making any supply through an electronic commerce operator who is required to collect tax at source under section 52; and
(vii) who is not engaged in making supplies of the goods, of the description Ice cream and other edible ice, whether or not containing cocoa [HSN 2105 00 00], Pan Masala [HSN 2206 90 20] or goods, i.e. Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes [Chapter 24].
Earlier we noted that manufacturers of these goods are not eligible to avail composition scheme but other suppliers of these goods are eligible for composition levy. This notification restricts benefit of this notification to all suppliers of these goods. It looks like a drafting mistake.
2.Where more than one registered persons are having the same Permanent Account Number, issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), central tax on supplies by all such registered persons is paid at the rate specified in column (2) under this notification.
3. The registered person shall not collect any tax from the recipient on supplies made by him nor shall he be entitled to any credit of input tax.
This provision looks harsh. 6% is a quite high rate for GST and not allowing them to collect tax from the recipient [and thereby denying Input Credit to the recipient] appears to be a big restriction on businesses of MSME for which such notification has been issued. In any case, if Input Credit is taken, there are very few businesses which can attain value addition requiring 6% GST payment in cash. It appears that small businesses are being penalized for not able to follow super complex GST procedures designed by some tax-bureaucrat sitting in ivory tower.
4. The registered person shall issue, instead of tax invoice, a bill of supply as referred to in clause (c) of sub-section (3) of section 31 of the said Act with particulars as prescribed in rule 49 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules.
5. The registered person shall mention the following words at the top of the bill of supply, namely: – ‘taxable person paying tax in terms of notification No. 2/2019-Central Tax (Rate) dated 07.03.2019, not eligible to collect tax on supplies’.
6. The registered person opting to pay central tax at the rate of three percent under this notification shall be liable to pay central tax at the rate of three percent on all outward supplies specified in column (1) notwithstanding any other notification issued under sub-section (1) of section 9 or under section 11 of said Act.
A large percentage of goods attract tax rate of less than 6% with input tax credit. Why would somebody choose an exemption notification to pay tax at a higher rate, without ITC and without collection of the same from the recipient.
7. The registered person opting to pay central tax at the rate of three percent under this notification shall be liable to pay central tax on inward supplies on which he is liable to pay tax under sub-section (3) or, as the case may be, under sub-section (4) of section 9 of said Act at the applicable rates [reverse charge liability is required to be discharged at appropriate rate].
The notification explains that the expression “first supplies of goods or services or both” shall, for the purposes of determining eligibility of a person to pay tax under this notification, include the supplies from the first day of April of a financial year to the date from which he becomes liable for registration under the said Act but for the purpose of determination of tax payable under this notification shall not include the supplies from the first day of April of a financial year to the date from which he becomes liable for registration under the Act.
Thus, this exemption exempt supplies of primarily services, of 50 lakhs rupees inclusive of the basic exemption limit [20 lakhs]. The basic exemption limit has been increased to 40 lakhs only for exclusive supplier of goods vide Notification No. 10/2019-Central Tax New Delhi, the 7th March, 2019; who are eligible for composition levy and hence not eligible for this exemption.
Supply of Food:
Mere supply of food items is supply of goods, eligible for composition scheme at the rate of 0.5% [1% IGST]. It amounts to supply only when such goods (food items) are supply by way of service. Clause 6(b) of the Schedule-II of the CGST Act reads as,
“Supply, by way of or as part of any service or in any other manner whatsoever, of goods, being food or any other article for human consumption or any drink (other than alcoholic liquor for human consumption), where such supply or service is for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration.”
Supply of goods, being food or any other article of human consumption or drink, shall amount to supply of service only when such goods are supplied “by way of or as part of any service or in any other manner whatsoever”. Similar question was raised before Authority of Advanced Ruling [In Re: Ananya Goyal [2018 (14) G.S.T.L. 299 (A.A.R. – GST)] and the authority answered that manufacturing of food articles and its supply only from take away centre without any sitting facility is a “supply of services”. It is humbly submitted that the decision needs reconsideration.
Exercise of option of composition scheme:
Procedure has been prescribed in Rule 3 to Rule 7 of the CGST Rules. The scheme is applicable only to registered person. Only a registered person can opt for composition levy. Benefit of composition scheme is available only when it is opted. The entitlement to avail the benefits of the composition scheme is only after an option is exercised. The intimation for exercise of option of composition levy is required to be given under Rule 3 of the CGST Rules. The intimation for composition levy shall be considered only after the grant of registration to the applicant. Any intimation for exercise of option of composition levy in respect of any place of business in any State or Union territory shall be deemed to be an intimation in respect of all other places of business registered on the same Permanent Account Number.
It is possible that a person is already registered and paying GST under normal provisions. Such persons are also allowed to move to composition scheme if he is otherwise eligible for the scheme. The option to pay tax under section 10 shall be effective from the beginning of the financial year, where the intimation is filed by a registered person, i.e. when any registered person is opting to shift to composition levy, such option can be exercised only from the beginning of next financial year.
Intimation is not required to be given every year. Once the option is exercised, it continues till the time the person is eligible for the scheme. The option exercised by a registered person to pay tax under Section 10 of the GCGST Act shall remain valid so long as he satisfies all the conditions mentioned in the said section and under these rules.
The person under composition scheme shall be liable to pay tax normally from the day he ceases to satisfy any of the conditions mentioned in Section 10 of the CGST Act and shall issue tax invoice for every taxable supply made thereafter and he shall also file an intimation for withdrawal from the scheme within seven days of the occurrence of such event.
Voluntary withdrawal from scheme:
A person, even though still eligible for composition scheme, may opt out of the composition scheme by filing an application for withdrawal on which an order of withdrawal is required to be passed by the appropriate officer. It is clarified that in a case where the taxpayer has sought withdrawal from the composition scheme, the effective date shall be the date indicated by him in his intimation/application filed, but such date may not be prior to the commencement of the financial year in which such intimation/application for withdrawal is being filed.
Input Tax Credit:
A person opting for and paying GST in composition scheme is not entitled to take any credit of input tax. Further input tax credit is not available to recipient of supply if the supplier has opted for composition scheme as per Section 17(5)(e) of the CGST Act, 2017.
[The author is Managing Partner of Rajesh Kumar and Associates and can be contacted on email@example.com]