Goods and Services Tax : The GST Council at its meeting on May 18, 19 has evolved a consensus on GST rates for goods and services, leading us closer to Jul...
Goods and Services Tax : As per Section 12(6) of CGST Act, 2017 relating to Time of Supply of Goods states that time of supply to the extent it relates to ...
Goods and Services Tax : Since the assessee has the option to take single registration for business verticals within a State, it will be imperative for the...
Goods and Services Tax : At present, the manufacturers/dealers registered under the Central Excise Act, 1944 have the option to surrender their registratio...
Goods and Services Tax : Generally place of supply will be the place of recipient of service, if it is not available then place of supplier of service exce...
we are attempting to present the grounds on which departmental authorities are disallowing the refund claims relating to “Amount of 500/-” against the services on which refund has been claimed. This complete state of affairs is humorously picturized
In continuation of the series of previous two articles, elaborating the difficulties in getting the refund claim due to conditions relating to Invoice and CHA service, we in this article are attempting to present the problems existing in the Service
INTRODUCTION: “A good beginning makes a good end”. Hope this comes true for the draft scheme of “On site audit”. Export-Import is an important determinant of growth of a country. A strict policy regarding the import-export may become an obstacle in
Presently, assesses are claiming refund orders on the services provided by CHA which are gigantic problematic services in getting refund. The refunds claimed by the assessees as against their exports are their civil rights but are being declined by the departmental authorities on various arguments which are of no significance and value less. The various reasons on which the department is refusing these refund claims on the said service are highlighted as under:
Today, in the present scenario also, the poor exporter is still facing enormous difficulty in getting refund orders as stated in the lines above. There is no radical change has taken place even after the change of total scheme by the Government. The refund claims are the Right of the exporters but the department is rejecting these claims on various grounds which are of trivial importance.
“Too many cooks spoil the broth” perhaps this would have been in the thoughts of Group on Implementation of GST while analyzing the organizational structure for GST. This group is a committee constituted by the Government that has been framed to analyze all the aspects which will be affected by implementation of GST. On 12.07.2010, the Group has given their report. In this article, we are discussing the administrative changes proposed by the Group under GST regime.
Every Finance Act brings with it some new services under the purview of the Service Tax. The Associated Enterprises were also a part of those services that were brought under Service Tax Act in the year 2008 vide the Finance Act. From the beginning the service of the Associated Enterprise is walking with some uniqueness.
Before the recent amendment in Explanation 2 of the Rule 2 (k) the assessee was claiming credit on Cement and steel items as inputs used in the manufacture of capital goods. To this the argument by the assessee was that the said items were being used indirectly in relation to the manufacture of finished goods and whatever is used in the manufacture of final product will be available for Cenvat credit.
There are already two articles published on our website www.capradeepjain.com on this issue. The title of these articles was “SSI exemption: – The branded issue” and “Brand name for packing material: – all is well when ends well”. The budget has made further amendment while passing the budget to end the controversy. This amendment has prompted us to write this third piece on this very same issue. We will discuss the issue in brief to have a better understanding of the subject and thereafter will discuss the implications of this amendment.
Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 provided that the cenvat credit will not be admissible on the inputs or input services which are used in the manufacture of exempted goods or which are used in providing the exempted services. The Rule 6 ibid also said that if the common inputs are used for manufacture of dutiable and exempted goods and the manufacturer is not able to maintain separate inventory then he has to reverse the cenvat credit at specified rate.
