In the case of Crystal Crop Protection Limited [GST-ARA-31/2021-22/B-50]. The AAR held that the transfer of business by way of merger of two GSTINs having same PAN would not qualify as ‘transfer of business as going concern’ and hence would constitute as supply of Goods and not supply of Services.
The Tamil Nadu Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) has affirmed the observations of Tamil Nadu AAR and held that ITC of GST paid on procurement of goods/services for the promotional scheme is not available as per Section 17(5) of the CGST Act. The AAAR elucidated that since the retailers ultimately consumed the goods/services provided under the reward scheme, such personal consumption by appellant or by its retailers would disentitle them to avail ITC. Hence, the contention regarding applicability of clause to the stage of procurement use and not on the last use would be of no avail to the appellant. The AAAR has emphasised upon the non-obstante clauses of Section 17(5) and remarked that these clauses put embargo on availability of ITC itself. The AAAR concluded that giving away of goods/services under the scheme is not a supply. Therefore, ITC of the GST paid on the goods/services procured for the scheme is not available to the appellant.
The Madras High Court (HC) allowed credit of service tax paid under RCM [after the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST)], which could not be availed as transitional credit. The HC ruled that the chance of seeking a refund or credit cannot be denied merely because the transitional provision has come into effect and credit could not be claimed under Section 140(1). The HC observed that taxpayers should not be rendered remediless and, hence, invoked the doctrine of necessity as the HC felt it a dire necessity for the legislation to address such situations. The HC noted that if the GST regime had not come into effect, the petitioner would have been eligible to claim the Central Value Added Tax (CENVAT) credit of all the amounts paid. Thus, the HC suggested the Revenue to carry forward the credit in the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner.
This Tax Alert summarizes a recent Supreme Court (SC) ruling in the case of Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd. (Taxpayer), wherein the issue before the SC was whether an issue of notice, in the name of amalgamating company post the Appointed Date and passing of assessment order in the name of amalgamating company as represented by amalgamated company, would invalidate the assessment since amalgamating company ceases to exist in law post the Appointed Date.
This Tax Alert explains Notification dated 30 March 2022 issued by the CBDT which exempts individuals, not resident in India (NR) as per the provisions of Income Tax Laws and visiting India, from tax collection at source (TCS) on foreign remittances made under Liberalized Remittance Scheme (LRS) and for purchase of overseas tour program package (OTPP).
This Tax Alert explains Notification No. 17/2022 dated 29 March 2022, Press Release dated 30 March 2022 and Circular No. 7/2022 dated 30 March 2022 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), providing quantum of fees to be levied on the taxpayer who fails to link their Aadhaar with their Permanent Account Number (PAN), as mandated by the Income Tax Laws , on or before 31 March 2022, as well as the last operative date for PAN which is not linked with Aadhaar.
This Tax Alert summarizes a recent Notification and Public Notice [1] issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) extending Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020 (FTP) by further six months.
