Lulu Bolgatty International Convention CentreGrand Hyatt, Kochi, Kerala

18th & 19th November 2019(Monday & Tuesday)

NEWSLETTER

ERNAKULAM BRANCH OF SIRC OF THE INSTITUTE Of CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA

October 2019

Issue No: 102Vol: VIII

Chairman’s MessageJudicial Decisions on Direct TaxesJudicial Decisions on Indirect Taxes51st Regional Conference Programme

INSIDE

Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

February 2019NEWSLETTER

Chairman’s Message

Dear Professional Colleagues,

I am sure that the extension of due dates for filing of Income Tax Returns and Tax Audit Reports which was due for filing on Sep 30th 2019 to Oct 31st 2019 has brought a sigh of relief among most of our pro-fessional colleagues, though it continues to keep us busy this month. The need was a genuine one and we should thank the Government for considering the requests received and giving us more time for ren-dering quality professional services to our clients.

Though September was a very busy month, as true Keralites we all celebrated Onam. Last year we faced one of the worst calamities that we have ever wit-nessed during Onam time and we could not celebrate the festival. This year we witnessed celebrations all over, in offices, schools, colleges, etc. At Ernakulam Branch too we celebrated Onam along with the One Day Seminar on Tax Audit and Professional Ethics at Gokulam Convention Centre, Kaloor on Sep 7th, 2019. We also had special celebrations for students, faculty members of the Branch and Branch staff members on Sep 6th. On the same day we distribut-ed new clothes (100 Onakodis) to the inmates of the cancer ward at the Ernakulam General Hospital.

We have been receiving directions from the head of-fice to conduct more programmes on Code of Ethics and Ethical Standards. In view of the responsibility and trust shown by the Government, and the society at large on our Members, it is indeed the need of the hour to enhance the awareness on Code of Ethics also, apart from their core competence area, because it clearly lays out the rules for behaviour and provides the groundwork for a pre-emptive warning. During our one day CPE seminar held on Sep 7, 2019 we had a two hour session on Ethical Standards & Disciplinary Proceedings by our Central Council Member CA. Ra-jendra Kumar, which I am sure would have benefitted all the members who attended the programme. We will be conducting more sessions on the subject in the days to come.

In October we are planning a One Day CPE Semi-nar on Companies Act, 2013 on the 5th of Oct, 2019. Hon’ Justice Sri. Shaji P Chaly has consented to be the Chief Guest. The honourable members of the NCLT, Kochi Bench, Sri. Ashok Kumar Borah and Sri. Brahma Rao have also been invited as guests of honour. The Registrar of Companies, Kerala Sri. Gulab Chand Yadav has also accepted our invitation and confirmed his presence. Technical sessions will be handled by CA. Chinnsamy Ganeshan and CA. R.G. Rajan from Chennai. There will also be a spe-cial session on opportunities for CAs in NCLT which will be taken by CA. Shawn Jeff Christopher and CA. Sherry Oommen.

More programmes are planned in the month of Octo-ber. A lecture meeting on Sabka Viswas (Legacy Dis-pute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 has been scheduled for Oct 9, 2019. We will be conducting an evening CPE seminar on Accounting Standards for Non Cor-porate Entities on Oct 16, 2019 by CA. Amal Paul. A one day workshop on Goods & Services Act is being planned on Oct 17, 2019. CA. Ganesh Prabhu from Chennai and CA. M.P.Tony from Thrissur have con-sented to be the faculties for the technical sessions. Apart from these there will also be an evening CPE seminar on Standards on Auditing by CA. G.Renga-rajan on Oct 25, 2019.

We are all eagerly looking forward to the 51st Re-gional Conference of SIRC of ICAI to be held on Nov 18th & 19th at Lulu Bolgatty International Conven-tion Centre, Grand Hyatt, Kochi, which will be proudly hosted by Ernakulam Branch. I request all the mem-bers to register for the same at the earliest. You may do the registration online at www.sircoficai.org. A link has also been provided in our website www.kochiic-ai.org. Alternately, you may also pay by cheque or credit card at the Ernakulam Branch office. We have decided to give a special discount of Rs.300/- for members who are enrolled in the Ernakulam Branch Annual Registration Scheme (ARS), 2019. The dis-count will be in the form of a cash back post event. Let us make this gala even a grand success and a memorable one.

Before I sign off, I would also request all our mem-bers to generously contribute to the Chartered Ac-countants Benevolent Fund (CABF). You may make your payment at the Branch office by cheque or cred-it card. All members contributing Rs.10,000/- or more will be specially recognised during one of our major events in December, 2019. I take this opportunity to wish every member and their family a very happy Na-varathri & Deepavali.

Jai Hind! Jai ICAI!

CA.Sreenivasan P.R

Chairman

October 2019NEWSLETTER

3Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

Reported Judicial DecisionsCA.P.M Veeramani FCA

Direct Tax

Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.2(28A) – Compen-sation for delay Decision in favour of : Assessee

Title: Principal CIT vs West Bengal Housing Infra-

structure Development Corporation Ltd

Citation: 413 ITR 82 Bench: Calcutta HC

Payment of compensation by assesse to allottees in terms of agreement towards delay in handling over the plots was neither towards borrowing of money nor incurring of debts and interest as defined in sec-tion 2(28A) has no application to such payments and consequently there is no liability for TDS under sec-tion 194A. The expression interest in clause of the agreement was merely for quantification of liability in terms of interest payable by SBI.

Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.4 – Voluntary pay-ment Decision in favour of : Assessee

Title : D.J.Malpani vs CCE

Citation: 176 DTR SC 305 Bench: Supreme Court of India

If the amount is paid at the time of the sale transac-tion for a purpose other than the price of the goods, it cannot form part of the transaction value; Dharma-da is a donation or an offering made for the purpose of charity as distinct from a commercial transaction. Though paid along with the sale price, the payment was voluntarily by the purchaser. Purchase of the goods is the occasion and not the consideration for the dharmada paid by the customer.Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.5 – Advance rent is business income Decision in favour of : Revenue

Title : CIT vs Amritha Cyber Park Private Ltd

Citation: 412 ITR 199 Bench: Kerala HC

Assessee engaged in the business of letting out commercial space showed advance rent from parties who could not occupy the premises as liability in its accounts. Since the normal period of limitation was over for the parties to claim the amount and there was no response to the notice issued , the unclaimed advance rent is to be considered as business income following decision of supreme court in the case of 222 ITR 344 SC

Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.15, 192 – Salary of Nuns / PriestDecision in favour of : Revenue

Title : UOI vs The Society of Mary Immaculate

Citation: 412 ITR 545 Bench: Madras HC

For the concept of diversion of income by overriding title to apply, the diversion of income must be effec-tive at the stage when the amount in question leaves the source, on it way to the intended recipient. Sal-ary in question was not directly received by the con-gregation or religion by overriding diversion of title, but was paid by the State to the teachers who were nuns or missionaries. Hence there was no income by overriding title and salary was subject to TDS under section 192Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.41(1) – Cessation depending on factsDecision in favour of : Revenue

Title : West Asia Exports & Imports Private Ltd

October 2019NEWSLETTER

4 Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAIErnakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

Citation: 412 ITR 208 Bench: Chennai HC

The lapse of ten years coupled with the fact that there was change of business altogether by the assesse, in our opinion, justified the AO to draw adverse infer-ence against the assesse about cessation of liabili-ty especially when assesse failed to produce written confirmation from trade creditors of earlier business. Cessation of liability should depend upon facts and circumstances of each case

Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.68 – First year of businessDecision in favour of : Assessee

Title : CIT vs Sree Ganesh Trading Co

Citation: 413 ITR 61 Bench: Kerala HC

Where credits are observed in partners accounts in the first year of business of the firm and partners fur-nish credit materials to show the source from where the funds were brought in , no addition can be made in the hands of the firm. If the sources of the credi-tors were doubted by AO, there could be assessment made only on such persons and not on the firm.

Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.183 – IDS Scheme 2016Decision in favour of : Revenue

Title : Umesh D Ganore va Principal CIT

Citation: 413 ITR 66Bench: Bombay HC

IDS Scheme 2016 brought in by Finance Act 2016 does not provide for adjustment of tax due under the scheme against advance tax or self assessment tax. Hence, in relation to those assessment years were the assesse sought for adjustment of self assess-ment tax/ advance tax towards the tax due on the income declared under the scheme, the declaration

fails and action of Revenue authorities confirmed. In relation to those years where no such adjustment is sought for , the declarations should be accepted

Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.194 H – Charges retained by banks Decision in favour of : Assessee

Title : ACIT vs Spicejet Ltd

Citation: 71 ITR Trib 56Bench: ITAT Delhi

Charges retained by banks and credit card agen-cies out of the sale consideration of tickets booked through credit and debit cards and not covered under definition of commission or brokerage and hence no liability for TDS

Statute: Income Tax Act – 194 C vs 194 J – Pay-ment to Film ArtistDecision in favour of : Assessee

Title : Malayalam Communications Ltd vs ITO (TDS)

Citation: 175 ITD 433 Bench: ITAT Cochin

As per explanation vide CBDT notification dated 12th Janaury 1977 “film artist” means any engaged in his professional capacity in the production of a cine-matographic film, whether produced by him or by any other person. Since the assesse made payments to various artists like singers, musicians etc who partici-pated in reality shows hosted by it as guests or judg-es, tax was required to be deducted at source only under 194 C as the payments were not for production of cinematographic film

Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.226(3) - No action against deductee Decision in favour of : Assesssee

Title : Pushkar Prabhat Chandra Jain vs UOI

October 2019NEWSLETTER

5Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

Citation: 175 DTR 99 Bench: Bombay HC

On non-deposit of TDS by deductor, the assesse de-ductee cannot be asked to pay the same again; ac-tion can be taken against the payer only; notice under section 226(3) against payee is quashed and depart-ment directed to refund amount recovered from the assessee

Statute: Income Tax Act – Sec.251(1)(a) – CIT(A) power to enhanceDecision in favour of : Assessee

Title : Hari Mohan Sharma vs ACIT

Citation: 71 ITR TRib 18Bench: ITAT Delhi

Enhancement by CIT(A) was prohibited on the issues which had not at all been considered by the AO dur-ing assessment proceedings. CIT(A) could not en-hance income of assesse on altogether no source. Where assesse claimed deduction under section 54F which was denied by the AO, in appeal CITA() cannot enhance assessment holding that the sale itself was bogus and income should be considered under other sources

October 2019NEWSLETTER

6 Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAIErnakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

RECENT ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER GST AND JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON INDIRECT TAXES

Indirect Tax

CA.P.J.Johney FCAA . RECENT ADVANCE RULINGS UNDER GST

Statute: Goods and Service Tax Decision in favour of: Department

Title:UDAYAN CINEMA PVT. LTD, In re

SYDNEY D’SILVA and PARTHASARATHI DEY(Members)

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 63 (AAR) Bench/Court:Before the Authority for Advance Ruling

Goods And Service Tax-Classification-Service Of Line Producer- Production Of Feature Film, A Portion of Which Planned to be Shot at Locations outside In-dia-Applicant Appointing CDI Virtual Films Inc. As a Line Producer In Brazil-Provisioning Motion Picture Production Service Classifiable Under SAC 999612- Is Import of Service and Constitutes Inter-State Sup-ply- Applicant Liable To Pay IGST On Payments to CDIVF In Terms Of SL. No. 1 Of Notification No. 10/2017-IGST (Rate) Dated June 28, 2017 at 18 Per Cent. Rate Specified Under Sl. No. 34(Vi) of Notifica-tion No. 08/2017-It (Rate) Dated June 28, 2017-Re-imbursements Made On Actual Cost Basis—No De-duction Available In Terms Of Contract from Value Of Supply Of Motion Picture Production Service as CDIVF Not Pure Agent-If Contract Altered Having CDIF As Pure Agent For Additional Services—Import of Services From Actual Suppliers-Amount Paid On Actual Cost Basis For Procuring Such Services Sub-jected To IGST at Applicable Rate—Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act (13 Of 2017), SS. 7(4), 13(3) To (13)—Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, r. 33 (III). Statute: Goods and Service Tax Decision in favour of:Assessee

Title:Ahmednagar District Goat Rearing And Processing

Co-Op. Federation Ltd.,In ReSMT. SUNGITA SHARMA and RAJIV JALOTA

(Members)

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 88 (AAR) Bench/Court: Before the Authority for Advance Ruling

Goods and Services Tax — Exemption — Supply to

Army Against Tenders — Unit Container— Definition -Whole (Sheep/Goat) Animal Carcass in Its Natural Shape in Frozen State In Different Weight And Size Packed In LDPE Bags Without Mentioning Weight and One or Two Such LDPE Bags Further Packed In HDPE Bags — Product Not Put Up in “Unit Contain-er” —Exempt—Central Goods and Services Tax Act (12 Of 2017)—Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act (43 Of 2017).Construction Of Taxing Statutes — Exemption Notifi-cation— Plain Meaning.

Statute: Goods and Service Tax Decision in favour of: Department

Title:Fermi Solar Farms PVT LTD., In re

B.V. Borhade and Pankaj Kumar (Members)

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 337 (AAR) Bench/Court:Before the Authority for Advanced Rul-ing

Goods and Services Tax — Works contract — Supply of Services — Transaction of Setting up and opera-tion of Solar Photovoltaic plant in Nature of “Works Contract “— Schedule II (Activities to be treated as supply of goods or supply of Services) Treats “Works Contracts “ Under Section 2(119) as supply of “Ser-vices” — Taxable at 18 per Cent . Under IGST Act and Nine Per Cent. Each under CGST Act and MGST Act — Whether Parts when Supplied without PV mod-ules be Eligible to concessional Rate and Whether Benefit of Concessional Rate of solar power gener-ation system and parts thereof available to sub-con-tractors cannot be answered in absence of relevant documents — “immovable Property “ — Meaning of — Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 , s.2(119).

Statute: Goods And Services Tax Decision in favour of: Assessee

Title: Neuvera Wellness Ventures Pvt. Ltd.

v State Of GujaratMs. HarshaDevani And Bhargav D. Karia JJ

Citation: [2019] 65 GSTR 157 (Guj) Bench/Court:In The Gujarat High Court

October 2019NEWSLETTER

7Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

Goods And Services Tax—Detention Of Goods—Sei-zure Of Goods—Perishable Goods— Detention for Failure to Produce Part B Of E-Way Bill— Assessee Generating Part B and Explaining That Goods Per-ishable and Had to be Transported Urgently, That Goods Imported Goods Taken from Customs Bonded Warehouse To Its Own Godown and There Was No Supply And That Integrated Goods And Services Tax Paid Before Movement Of Goods— Failure By Officer To Consider Explanation And To Record Reasons— Detention Of Goods And Levy Of Tax And Penalty Not Sustainable—Central Goods And Services Tax Act (12 Of 2017), Ss. 129, 130.

B.JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON INDIRECT TAXES

Statute: Value Added Tax Decision in favour of:Assessee

Title:Bhargava Motors v Union Of India And Others

Dr. S. MURALIDHAR and I. S. MEHTA JJ.

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 114 (Delhi) Bench/Court:In The Allahabad High Court

Goods and Services Tax — Transition Provisions—Input Tax Credit—Technical Difficulty In Revising Or Reviewing Form Trans-1 Uploaded—Direction To Department To Enable Dealer To File Tran-1 Again Electronically Or To Accept Manually Filed Tran-1—Direction To Department To Consider Improvements To Software. Statute: Value Added Tax Decision In Favour Of: Department

Title: Punjab State Warehousing Corporation v State

Of Punjab And AnotherAJAY KUMAR MITTAL and MRS. MANJARI NEH-

RU KAUL JJ.

Citation:[2019] 65 GSTR 107 (All) Bench/Court: In The Allahabad High Court

Value Added Tax—Appeal to Commissioner (Ap-peals) —Predeposit—Application For Waiver—Dep-uty Excise And Taxation Commissioner (Appeals) Directing Deposit Of 25 Per Cent. Of Additional De-mand As Condition For Entertaining Appeal—Rea-sonable—Punjab Value Added Tax Act (8 Of 2005), S. 62(5). Statute: Value Added Tax Decision in favour of:Petitioner

Title:Ambala Foods Private Limited v State Of Haryana

And OthersAJAY KUMAR MITTAL and MRS MANJARI NEHRU

KAUL JJ.

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 144 (P&H) Bench/Court:In The Punjab And Haryana High Court

Value Added Tax—Sales Tax— Recovery Of Tax—Surety Given By Director Of Company In Respect Of Dealer In Individual Capacity — Recovery From Company Not Permissible. Statute: Service Tax Decision in favour of:Assessee

Title:Ganesan Builders Ltd v Commissioner Of Ser-

vice Tax, ChennaiT. S. SIVAGNANAM and

Mrs. V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN J

Citation:[2019] 65 GSTR 127 (Ker) Bench/Court:In The Kerala High Court

Service Tax—Cenvat Credit— Input Service — Defi-nition—Exclusion Of Services “Used Primarily For Personal Use Or Consumption Of Any Employee” — Assessee Engaged In Construction Services — Insurance Services Provided by Assessee To Work-ers Working At Its Site, Which It Was Obliged To Provide Under Statute—Policy Describing Assessee as Insured And Specifying Area Where Construction Works Carried On—Employees For Whom Premium Paid Not Described By Their Names, But By Their Vocation Or Skill— Services Not “Used Primarily For Employee “ – Not Excluded _ Cenvat Credit Rules , 2004, R.2(1)(C).

Statute: Value Added Tax Decision in favour of: Assessee

Title:GODREJ CONSUMER PRODUCT LTD v STATE

OF GUJARATAKIL KURESHI and B. N. Karta JJ.

Citation:[2019] 65 GSTR 157 (Guj) Bench/Court:In The Gujarat High Court

Value Added Tax— Commissioner — Determination Of Disputed Questions — Entries In Schedule—Clas-sification— Determination Order By Commission-er Binds Parties Before Commissioner If Order Not Disputed— Department Cannot Cite Determination Order In Case Of Other Manufacturer Or Dealer If

October 2019NEWSLETTER

8 Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAIErnakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

Classification Disputed— Determination Would Bind Department In Relation to Other Assessees Also In Case Of Same Product If Department Did Not Ques-tion Order—Commissioner On Application By Peti-tioner’s Distributor Holding By Order Dated Decem-ber 31, 2013 That Product In Question Classifiable Under Entry 34 Of Schedule I as Mehendi Inviting No Duty—Assessing Officer Assessing Petitioner For 2013-14 Classifying Same Product Under Residuary Clause— Erroneous— Assessing Officer Cannot Discard Determination Order Passed By Commis-sioner— Also Against Tax Credit System Upon Suc-cessive Sales—Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (1 Of 2005), S. 80 ; Sch. I, Entry 34.

Statute: Service Tax Decision in favour of: Department

Title:Oil Field Warehouse And Service Limited v Union

Of India AKIL KURESHI AND B. N. KARRIA JJ.

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 105 (Guj) Bench/Court: In the Gujarat High Court

Service Tax— Audit — Notice By Comptroller and Au-ditor General Calling Upon Assessee To Submit To Audit By His Officers— Repeal Of Service Tax Law Upon Introduction Of Goods And Ser- Vices Tax—Rule 5a Not Saved—Power Of Comptroller And Audi- Tor General To Issue Notice Doubtful—Interim Stay On Further Action By Comptroller And Auditor Gen-eral—Central Goops And Services Tax Act (12 Of 2017), S. 174(2)(E)—Service Tax Rules, 1994, R. 5a.

Statute: Sales Tax Decision in favour of: Assessee

Title:K. Sankaran v State Of Kerala

K. VinopChandran and Ashok Menon JJ

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 188 (Ker)] Bench/Court:In The Kerala High Court

Sales Tax—Revision—Limitation—Order Passed Af-ter Four Years From Reassessment Order But Within One Year From Penalty Order—Deputy Commission-er Could Not Have Revised Assessment After Four Years Based On Subsequent Detection Of Offence Or Order Of Penalty—Kerala General Sales Tax Acr (15 Of 1963), S. 35(2a).Appeal To Appellate Tribunal— Review—Review Of Order Passed By Three-Member Bench By Bench Of Two-Member— Judicial Impropriety.

Appeal To -Appellate Tribunal—Review—Condition Prece- Dent—Only On Basis Of Discovery Of New And Important Facts— No New Or Important Facts Urged Before Tribunal On Review— Review Not Maintainable—Kerala General Sates Tax Act (15 Of 1963), S. 39(7).

Statute: Value Added TaxDecision in favour of:Assessee

Title:Hotel Pallavi v State Of Karnataka

PankajMithal, Manoj Kumar Gupta And Suneet Kumar JJ.

Citation:[2019] 65 GSTR 415 (All) [FB] Bench/Court:In The Karnataka High Court

Value Added Tax—Karasamadhana Scheme, 2017 —Determination Of Arrears Of Tax And Arrears Of Interest And Penalty— Sums Deposited By Dealer In Pursuance Of Assessment Order Or After Assess-ment Order Passed—To Be First Adjusted Towards Tax Dues For Determination Of Arrears—Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (32 Of 2004), S. 42(6)—Karasamadhana Scheme, 2017.

Statute: Services Tax Decision in favour of: Department

Title:Commisioner of CGST,ST and Central Excisev Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers LTD

S.C. Dharmadhikari and M.S. Karnik JJ.

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 307(Bom) Bench/Court: In The Bombay High Court

Service Tax — Supply Of Tangible Goods Service — Tribunal — 416 Wagon Given To Railways on Lease/Rent For 20 Years By Assesse by Agreement — Show — Cause Notice Issued For Recovery Of Tax, Interest and Penalty and order Passed by Commis-sioner Confirming Demand of Tax, Interest and Also Imposing Penalty — Order By Tribunal Overruling Decision of Commissioner With Single Observation that no foundation in show— Cause Notice bringing out Whether any service element involved — Cryptic Order Devoid of any Reason — Set Aside — Mat-ter Remitted — Finance Act (32 of 1994), s.65(105)(zzzzj). Statute: Sales Tax Decision in favour of: Assessee

Title:

October 2019NEWSLETTER

9Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

MRF LTD. v. COMMISIONER OF TRADE AND TAXES AND ANOTHER

S. RavindraBhat and A.K. Chawla JJ.

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 313 (Delhi) Bench/Court: In The Delhi High Court

Sales Tax — Refund — Interest — Pre Deposit Of Demand to Avail of Appellate Remedy Does not Nec-essarily Bear Character of Tax — Dealer Succeeding in High Court Holding Dealer Rightly Declared Turno-ver in Returns — Effect — Refund Due and Payable from Date Appeal Allowed — Postponement of time from Which Interest Paid to Filing of Form for Re-fund — Not Sustainable — Delhi Sales Tax Act (43 of 1975), s.30.

Statute: Value Added Tax Decision in favour of: Assessee

Title:Yadhu Sugar Mill LTD v Commissioner , Commer-

cial TaxesSaumitraDayal Singh J.

Citation:[2019] 66 GSTR 326 (All) Bench/Court:The The Allahabad High Court

Value Added Tax — Penalty — Interest — Tax De-duction at Source — Assessment Year 2010-11, First Year of Business and Assessment For Assessee— Tax Deduction at Source Made By assessee Not De-posited Within Time prescribed but Deposited with Interest before end of Calendar Year 2011 , And Be-fore Issuance of Notice — Department not Realizing Default or its Rectification by assesse, Till as late as September 9, 2014 — Penalty Not Attracted — Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act (5 of 2008),s.34(8).Words And Phrases — “MAY” and “Shall” Used in Two Parts of Same Sub- Section — Meaning of —Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act (5 of 2008), s.34 (8).

Construction of Taxing Statutes — Penalty — “May” and “Shall” Used in two parts of Same Sub- Section in Context of Same Penalty — Difference in Plain Grammatical Meaning of Two Words, to be Recog-nized and Given Full Effect. Statute: Value Added Tax Decision in favour of: :Assessee

Title:Superton Electronics Private Limited

v State Of Assam And OthersA. S. Bopanna C. J. And Arup Kumar Goswami J.

Citation:[2019] 65 GSTR 267 (Guwahati) Bench/Court:In The Guwahati High Court

Value Added Tax—Check-Post— Evasion Of Tax—Penalty— Seizure Of Goods—Rule Providing For Uploading Documents in Electronic Format —No Indication Of Consequences Of Failure to Do So —Presumption Of Evasion Of Taxes Rebuttable by Pro-duction Of Documents—Penalty Not To Be Levied Merely Because Of Failure to Upload them Online— Documents Claimed by Dealer to Have Accompa-nied Goods To Be Examined—If Authorities Satisfied That Documents in Physical Form Available On Date Of Movement Of Goods, Whether Penalty Leviable Only because Documents not Uploaded in Electronic Format to Be Considered— Matter Remanded—As-sam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (8 Of 2005), S. 75— Assam Value Added Tax Rues, 2005, r. 4l.Legislative Powers— Delegated Legislation —Check-Posts — Commissioner Empowered By Rules to Direct Information In Electronic Format To Be Up-loaded—Not A Case Of Sub-Delegation Of Power— Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (8 Of 2005), Ss. 75, 106—Assam Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, r. 41.

Statute: Service Tax Decision in favour of: Assessee

Title:CGST Belapur v Reliance Infocomm Infrastructure

LtdDr. Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member)

Citation:65 GSTR 296 (CESTAT-Mum) Bench/Court:The Customs, Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal — Mumbai

Service Tax – Penalty – Cenvat Credit – Wrongful Availment- Audit Party Pointing out Short-Payment of Tax—Assessee accepting objection and Discharging Service Tax Liability— No Show Cause Notice Is-sued On Shortfall And No Opportunity Provided To Assessee To Justify Such Mismatching—Not A Case Of Suppression With Mala Fide Intention To Evade Payment Of Tax—Penalty Not Leviable— Assessee Given Written Promise Before Commencement Of Audit That If Any Discrepancy Pointed Out And Was Complied With, No Further Litigation Would Ensue— Audit Conducted On Basis Of Books Of Account And Documents — Penalty Not Leviable — Finance Act (32 Of 1994), ss- 76,77, 73 — Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, r. 15.

NEWSLETTER

10 Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI

One Day CPE Seminar on Income Tax Audit and Professional Ethics

Distribution of Onakodi to Cancer Patients at General Hospital, Ernakulam

CA. Rajendra Kumar PCentral Council Member,

ICAI

CA. Sreenivasn P.RChairman,

ErnakulamICAI

CA. T.G.SureshChennai

CA. Sachin Kumar P.BBengaluru

CA. Babu Abraham Kallivayalil,Central Council Member,

ICAI

11E-Newsletter Published by CA.Sreenivasan P.R, Chairman, Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI , ‘ICAI Bhawan’,, Diwan’s Road, Ernakulam, kochi - 682016 Phone:

0484- 2362027. Email: ernakulam@icai.org. Website: www.ernakulam-icai.org Editor: CA.Sreenivasan P.R, Chairman, Ernakulam Branch of SIRC of ICAI