585
July 13 To July 19, 2019 u Taxmann’s Corporate Professionals Today u Vol. 45 u 59 Appropriateactiontobetakenby
Nodal officersforenablingassessee
to evisedfiler FormGSTTran-1Parshwa Builders v. Union of India [2019]
106 taxmann.com 150 (Madhya Pradesh)
The assessee after uploading Form GST
TRAN-1 had noticed that by mistake it had
not claimed credit of State Tax as reflected in
Value Added Tax(VAT) Return. The assessee
was not able to revise Form GST TRAN-1
on the GST portal.
The Applicant had filed a writ petition before
High Court of Madhya Pradesh seeking relief
to allow it to file revised Form GST TRAN-1.
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh directed
Nodal Officers to take appropriate action
to enable the assessee to file revised Form
GST Tran-1.
GST egistrationr notmandatoryin
every tates whereonlygodownsare
situatedGandhar Oil Refinery (India) Ltd., In re [2019]
106 taxmann.com 291 (AAR - Maharashtra)
The Applicant is trading in Non-coking Coal
in various states. The applicant is importing
coal from various ports and also purchases
from Indian dealers in various states. The
applicant has sought advance ruling on
whether it requires separate registration in
each State where it imports and stores the
coal in godowns?
The Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra
observed that the applicant is importing the
goods from various ports in India under
GSTIN of the Head Office located in Mumbai
and after importing the goods, they are
stored at godowns in various States. Entire
transactions of sale and purchase of coal are
done from Head office and all the invoices
are raised from the Head Office with Mumbai
GSTIN on which IGST is charged. Moreover,
the place of supply shall be the location of
importer and in this case, the place of supply
is Mumbai from where the applicant makes
taxable supply of goods.
The Authority for Advance ruling, Maharashtra
held that since the coal is only stored in
godowns in various States and all transactions
are done from the Head Office in Mumbai, the
applicant is not required to obtain separate
registration in each State. Open MarketValuetobetakenfor
goodssuppliedbydistinctpersons
where ecipientr eligibletoclaimfull
ITCKansai Nerolac paints Ltd., In re [2019] 106
taxmann.com 288 (AAR - Maharashtra)
The Applicant is a manufacturer and seller
of consumer and industrial paints to its
customers from factory and depots located
all over India. All depots and factories are
engaged in supplying only taxable goods and,
hence, all factories or depots are registered
business entities under GST. The Applicant
has sought advance ruling on whether supply
of goods by one distinct entity to another
distinct entity having same PAN can be
valued at a price declared in the invoice?
The Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra
observed that the factories and depots of the
company have same PAN but have distinct
registration Nos. under GST. Under GST, if
a person obtains or is required to obtain
more than one registration in more than one
state then each registration shall be treated
as distinct person. Thus, supply of paints
to depot from manufacturing units or from
one depot to another is considered as supply
between distinct persons.
The Applicant is presently discharging the
GST liability on transfer of goods from one
distinct person to another distinct person
where value of supply is taken as 110% of
the manufacturing cost. As per valuation rulesWEEKLY REVIEW