Browsed by
Tag: AAR

18% GST applicable to Works Contract of Residential Quarters, rules AAR

18% GST applicable to Works Contract of Residential Quarters, rules AAR

The Authority of Advance Ruling ( AAR ) in Madhya Pradesh has ruled that, 18% Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) applicable to Works Contract of Residential Quarters.

The AAR has clarified the rate of GST on contract for Construction of building and structure for colony a village Siveria at 2 x 660 MW Shree Singaji Thermal Power Project Stage – II Khandwa.

The AAR observed that the issue before us is squarely covered under Section 97(2)(a) of the Act and therefore we admit the application for consideration.

The authority vide order dtd.18.10.2018 had ruled that “The works contract service of construction of 599 residential quarters allotted to the applicant (Shreeji Infrastructure P.Ltd.) by MPPGCL will merit classification under SAC 9954 and would attract GST @18% (9%CGST + 9%SGST)”.

Construction of residential quarters, though within the precincts of Power Plant’ cannot by any stretch of argument and imagination be termed as the work entrusted to the applicant.

The AAR also observed that, the GST will be applicable @18% under SAC 9954, in as much as it refers to the construction of residential quarters, which was awarded to M/s.Shreeji Infrastructure P.Ltd., as already ruled vide our order no.15/2018 dtd.18.10.2018.

Source: TaxScan.

XaTTaX is Best GST Software, Simplify your Financial matters with GST eFiling Software for Return Filing & GST Billing Software in India.

  • Automate Invoicing and get Paid Faster
  • Integration with all popular accounting software
  • Manage your GST and E-WayBill Software anytime anywhere using multiple devices

Get Our GST Software DEMO and E-WAY BILL DEMO for FREE

Participation Fees for Conference Organized by Educational Institutions leviable to GST: AAR

Participation Fees for Conference Organized by Educational Institutions leviable to GST: AAR

The Madhya Pradesh Authority of Advance Ruling in an application filed by M/s Emrald Heights international School held that GST shall be leviable on consideration received by the school for participation in a conference organized.

The issue before the Authority is whether the consideration received by the school from the participant school(s) for the participation of their students and staff in the conference would be exempted under Entry No. 66/1/80 of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate). The second issue is concerning the applicable tax rate if the supply is not exempted.

The bench constituting of Hon’ble Members Shri Rajiv Agrawal and Shri Manoj Kumar Choubey held that the activities of holding Educational conference/ gathering of students, faculty and staff of other Schools are not exempt under relevant clauses of Entry 66/1/8 of the above-mentioned notification for the simple reason that the education conference does not fall under any of the categories so listed. Hence, GST shall be chargeable on the consideration received by the school from the participant school(s) for the participation of their students and staff in the impugned conference.

The Hon’ble Bench further stated that various services provided for organizing an educational conference/gathering of students and staff of other Schools, shall be liable to tax at the rate applicable to the respective services. For example, the catering services shall be liable to tax @ 5% without eligibility for Input Tax Credit.

Source: Taxscan

XaTTaX is Best GST Software, Simplify your Financial matters with GST eFiling Software for Return Filing & GST Billing Software in India.

  • Automate Invoicing and get Paid Faster
  • Integration with all popular accounting software
  • Manage your GST and E-WayBill Software anytime anywhere using multiple devices

Get Our GST Software DEMO and E-WAY BILL DEMO for FREE

No GST if maintenance paid to housing society is less than Rs 7,500 every month

No GST if maintenance paid to housing society is less than Rs 7,500 every month

The GST exemption on maintenance charges paid to a housing society by a member is available only if it doesn’t exceed Rs 7,500 per month, the Authority for Advance Rulings (Tamil Nadu) has ruled. If the charges exceed the sum, the entire amount is taxable.

In its order, the AAR bench provides a numerical illustration. If the maintenance charges are Rs 9,000 per month per member, GST shall be payable on the entire amount of Rs 9,000 at the rate of 18%. It shall not be payable on the differential of Rs 1,500 (Rs 9,000 minus Rs 7,500). The ruling has been recently made public and is in sync with a clarification issued (after the order) by the finance ministry on July 22.

Further, tax experts point out that if the annual collection of a housing society is less than Rs 20 lakh, it does not have to register for GST. Thus, it will not have to collect and pay GST even if the monthly amount of maintenance charges exceeds Rs 7,500 per month per member. It should also be noted that prior to January 25, 2018, the exemption limit was lower at Rs 5,000 per month.

Maintenance charges are collected by a housing society for various purposes like providing security, lift maintenance, maintenance of common areas like a lobby, garden, club house, swimming pool, to name a few instances. These charges are typically a reimbursement for expenses incurred by the housing society against payments made to third parties.

In this case before the AAR, a Chennai housing society – TVH Lumbini Square Owners Association – contended that if individual contributions towards maintenance exceeds Rs 7,500 per month, GST is liable to be paid on the differential, which is only on charges over and above this sum. The AAR ruled otherwise.

XaTTaX: Cloud and On-Premises Based GST Filing Software For India

Source: Times-of-India
Advance ruling: A useful tool for achieving tax certainty

Advance ruling: A useful tool for achieving tax certainty

Advance ruling can be obtained in respect of registration requirement, classification, determination of time and value of supply, admissibility of input tax credit and determination of the tax liability. Taxpayers need to exercise this option with caution, compared with other modes of obtaining certainty and dispute resolution, in view of the recent trend of adverse rulings.

India embarked on its journey of ‘One Nation One Tax’ with the introduction of the goods and services tax (GST) in July 2017. The landmark legislation, which has completed two years, is the biggest tax reform in India after independence. The GST Act subsumed erstwhile indirect taxes such as excise duty, value-added tax (VAT), service tax, etc.

In order to ensure uniformity in central and state GST laws, the GST Act promulgated setting up of a GST Council to recommend changes in the law for consistent implementation by the central and the state governments.

Being a new legislation, the GST law posed challenges for both the taxpayers as well as the tax practitioners in the form of interpretation of law, classification of goods and services, admissibility of input tax credit, applicability of exemption notification, etc.

In order to ensure faster disposal of these issues, the GST law borrowed one of the aspects from the erstwhile indirect tax legislation, ie the mechanism of obtaining an advance ruling. An advance ruling helps a taxpayer to obtain the required clarity on taxability of a transaction in advance thereby enabling it to avoid future disputes.

Under the GST law, an advance ruling can be obtained with respect to registration requirement, classification, determination of time and value of supply, admissibility of input tax credit of tax paid and determination of the liability to pay tax on any goods or services or both.

The Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has been constituted in each state/Union territory under the GST regime. An applicant seeking an advance ruling is required to file an application before the state/Union territory AAR providing required details such as the facts of the case, issues on which advance ruling is sought along with the contentions in relation thereto. The AAR is required to give its ruling within 90 days of the receipt of the application.

There is also an appellate forum created in each state in the form of Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR). Any applicant aggrieved by the AAR’s ruling can appeal before the AAAR. The AAAR is also required to pass its order within a period of 90 days of the filing of the appeal.

The advance ruling process has gained considerable traction under GST with close to 1,000 applications made to the advance ruling authorities by taxpayers. In a short span of two years, the AAR’s have passed rulings on various critical tax issues like tax treatment on transfer of business as a ‘going concern’, provision of back office support services by Indian entity to overseas entity, treatment of interest free security deposits, etc. One should note that while the ruling passed by the AAR and AAAR are binding only on the applicant and the jurisdictional authorities, the same carries persuasive value for others.

Thus, it can be seen that the aim of the advance rulings framework is to provide certainty and clarity to the taxpayer with respect to its obligations under the GST Act in a time-bound manner.

However, this does not mean that advance rulings are free from imperfection. One key limitation of the AAR/AAAR is that there have been numerous instances of divergent rulings being passed by different state AARs on issues such as taxability of cross charges for common administrative and IT support services by employees of one unit to other units, differential tax rates in case of solar energy sector etc. Further, there have been instances where decisions of the authorities are contrary to the position settled under the erstwhile indirect tax regime.

The GST Council, in order to address these limitation, had recommended formation of a centralized appellate authority. The Union cabinet has recently approved the formation of a national bench of the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) at New Delhi to address tax disputes due to contradictory rulings. However, the procedural guidelines of the GSTAT are yet to be issued. Thus, one may reasonably infer that the government is actively trying to address the current limitation in the existing advance ruling mechanism.

To conclude, a taxpayer should tread the path of obtaining an advance ruling with caution. The taxpayer should not only be well versed with the available jurisprudence under the erstwhile indirect tax regime but also be cognizant of the rulings passed by other AAR/AAAR, if any, on similar fact pattern. Further, it has generally been observed that cases where taxpayers have maintained appropriate documentation to substantiate their claims stand a better chance of obtaining a favourable ruling from the AAR.

While AAR/AAAR is a good mechanism for the tax payers to address their concerns, the recent trend of adverse / different rulings should be kept in mind before a tax payer opts for such a ruling. It is anticipated that once the GSTAT is fully operational, some of these concerns would get addressed. Till then, tax payers should act with caution and take this dispute resolution mechanism with a pinch of salt.

XaTTaX: Cloud and On-Premises Based GST Filing Software For India

Source: LiveMint
IT companies challenge government’s plan to brand BPOs as brokers & GST in court 

IT companies challenge government’s plan to brand BPOs as brokers & GST in court 

Are outsourcing units and BPOs merely intermediaries and brokers or are they exporters? About a week after the government released directions that Information Technology (IT) and Information Technology enabled Services (ITES) companies would attract 18 per cent goods and services tax (GST) for several exporters, some intermediaries have challenged the constitutional validity of such a regulation. 

Several back offices of BPOs and KPOs, already fighting the margin pressure, will have to pay 18 per cent GST after a government circular on July 18 said certain services shouldn’t be categorised as exports. As per the earlier tax regime, these companies did not attract any tax and up until 2018, even under GST, these companies would even get refunds for the input tax credits. 

However, following an authority of advance rulings (AAR) directive last December, indirect tax department had started issuing notices to several IT/ITES companies demanding up 18 per cent GST on money received on convertible foreign exchange. 

“The recent circular on intermediaries means that several back end services rendered to foreign service recipients would attract 18 per cent GST due to the place of provision of such services. We have challenged the constitutional validity of the place of provisions for intermediaries on various grounds in Gujarat High Court and the arguments would cover relief for different players including the services mentioned in the circular,” said Abhishek A Rastogi, a partner at Khaitan & Co. 

The government circular goes into length in explaining how GST should be levied on certain IT/ITES services supplied outside India as these are not exports but merely broking services. The indirect tax department had started issuing preliminary notices to captive units of multinationals and Indian companies exporting offshore support services. 

Industry trackers said the question now was whether BPOs are commission agents and brokers. If so, they would not be considered exporters and their revenues would be subject to taxes as only exports are exempted from domestic taxes and receive certain benefits. So, services provided by Indian entities to foreign companies would not be treated as exports and hence taxable in India. 

“Many BPOs and KPOs are already moving to Philippines in last few years and such a hit on the margins is set to push many more there,” said a senior tax official with an Indian IT firm. 

India currently boasts of an outsourcing market of about $50 billion a year. The government stand is set to impact the $13 bn outsourcing industry that is already facing pressure on margins, said a person in the know. 

“While the circular is not binding on the taxpayer, it’s binding on the tax officials; which means that many companies will stop getting refunds,” said a person advising one of the IT companies on the issue. 

Earlier, industry body Assocham and an IT lobby group had raised concerns around the future tax liability due to the government’s stand. Experts said under the earlier indirect tax regime, an intermediary was mainly a broker or a commission agent. However, any company supplying support services to a multinational was not treated as an intermediary. 

In the past, companies and tax experts had reached out to the government on the subject. They wanted the government to look at amending the law to treat any service provided by Indian companies as zero-rated or non-taxable if the customers were based overseas

Source: Economic-Times

XaTTaX is Best GST Software, Simplify your Financial matters with GST eFiling Software for Return Filing & GST Billing Software in India.

  • Automate Invoicing and get Paid Faster
  • Integration with all popular accounting software
  • Manage your GST and E-WayBill Software anytime anywhere using multiple devices

Get Our GST Software DEMO and E-WAY BILL DEMO for FREE

18% GST likely on back-end IT services as they don’t qualify as export

18% GST likely on back-end IT services as they don’t qualify as export

Most facilitation services the IT and ITeS sector offers at the back end, especially with respect to business process outsourcing, may attract an 18 per cent goods and services tax (GST) because the government has said those will not qualify as export.

Clearing the confusion related to exports of IT and ITeS services, the government said the services facilitating the supply of goods or services would not qualify as export and would be recognised as intermediaries, attracting an 18 per cent GST.

The move will have consequences for service providers in back-end services and post-sales support, among others.

Acting as facilitators between overseas parent companies and Indian customers by doing general marketing, answering basic enquiries, or providing post-sales support was, thus far, generally not being intermediaries, said Harpreet Singh, partner in KPMG.

“Unless the scope was substantive and involved concluding contracts, negotiating price, etc., tax was not paid, treating such services as export. This position needs to be re-visited now,” he said.

However, if service is given on one’s own account, it will be considered export.

Export is considered a zero-rated supply under the GST and a refund can be claimed.

The circular, issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), is aimed at putting to rest litigation and disputes related to export-related refunds.

However, experts have other views.

Atul Gupta, senior director, Deloitte India, said the CBIC circular mystified the issues and left open scope for litigation.

“It is going to be a detriment for the export of services because exporters no longer can claim input tax refunds on them,” he said.

Gupta said the circular was faulty and needed another look before it resulted in demand notices from GST field formations on outsourcing services.

Bipin Sapra, partner, EY, said certain grey areas continued but this would bring relief to a large section of IT and ITES exporters facing frivolous demands and denial of export benefits.

“The clarification will help in settling most objections regarding exports of services and the exporters will get refunds.”

The issue is important because strong representations were made by industry bodies such as Nasscom and Amcham for clarity on the subject.

Nasscom said it was studying the impact of the latest development.

The government has examined three broad scenarios, wherein a supplier of ITeS located in India supplies services for and on behalf of a client abroad, to clarify its treatment under the GST.

The Maharashtra Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) had upheld back-office operations do not qualify as export.

Abhishek Jain, tax partner, EY, said though the circular addressed customary back-office operations, matters that involved back-end and facilitation remained a matter of concern.

In situations where a back end services provider uses his own account as well as arranges or facilitates supplying support services related to pre- or post-delivery on behalf of overseas clients, taxability will be ascertained case by case.

Source: Business-Standard

XaTTaX is Best GST Software, Simplify your Financial matters with GST eFiling Software for Return Filing & GST Billing Software in India.

  • Automate Invoicing and get Paid Faster
  • Integration with all popular accounting software
  • Manage your GST and E-WayBill Software anytime anywhere using multiple devices

Get Our GST Software DEMO and E-WAY BILL DEMO for FREE

No Input Tax Credit for GST paid on expenses incurred on promotional schemes, rules AAR

No Input Tax Credit for GST paid on expenses incurred on promotional schemes, rules AAR

Input Tax Credit (ITC) will not be available on the Goods and Services Tax (GST) paid on expenses incurred towards promotional schemes, an order by the Maharashtra Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has said.

Although AAR rulings are applicable for the applicant and the jurisdictional tax officer in a particular matter, the same can be used a persuasive tool in similar matters. Accordingly, tax experts feel that the ruling can be important for automobile or FMCG companies which give gifts as a part of promotional schemes or as brand reminders.

Pharmaceutical company Sanofi India had approached AAR for rulings regarding two issues — whether input tax credit is available on the GST paid on expenses incurred towards promotional schemes of Shubh Labh Loyalty Program and whether input tax credit is available for the GST paid on expenses incurred towards promotional schemes given as brand reminders?

The company launched ‘Shubh Labh Trade Loyalty Program’ under which the distributors/wholesalers get reward points on the basis of goods sold by them. These points later enable them for rewards such as free trip to Singapore, wrist watch etc. Also, the company incurs various marketing and distribution expenses for distributing pens, notepads, key-chains etc. as promotional items/brand reminders to its distributors with its name embossed on such items.

Nature of ‘gift’
During the hearing, the applicant discussed the concept of ‘gift’ in light of the facts of the case and various judicial precedents under various other Statutes wherein it contended that as gift is a gratuity and act of generosity, the distribution of items by Sanofi for promoting the brand cannot be said to be an act of gratuity or generosity wherein the items are given to increase the sales of the company and advance of business. As regards the Shubh Labh Loyalty Program, the applicant submitted that the programme is not a gift but is given under contractual scheme (wherein the distributors are required to accept the terms & conditions on the Website).

However, in its response, the tax authority mentioned that the expenses under discussion incurred by the appellant are in the nature of ‘gift’ as “there is no commercial consideration and therefore input tax credit (‘ITC’) in respect of such expenses is restricted by virtue of GST law.”

The AAR held that since the items are not given by the applicant under any contractual obligation as no contract/agreement has been signed by customers in writing accepting the scheme floated by the applicant. Considering that the items are voluntarily, given on certain conditions achieved by its customers and without consideration in money, these are in the nature of ‘gift’. This means no ITC will be available.

According to Harpreet Singh, Partner at KPMG, in this case it has been held that items were not given by the applicant under any contractual obligation as no contract/agreement was signed by customers in writing accepting the scheme floated by the applicant. Accordingly, they partake the character of a gift. Therefore, “as a corollary, can one say that where scheme of giving promotional items is well documented and is as per a contractual arrangement, the same would be acceptable to authorities as a business expense not requiring any credit reversal,” he said.

Source: The-Hindu-Business-Line

XaTTaX is Best GST Software, Simplify your Financial matters with GST eFiling Software for Return Filing & GST Billing Software in India.

  • Automate Invoicing and get Paid Faster
  • Integration with all popular accounting software
  • Manage your GST and E-WayBill Software anytime anywhere using multiple devices

Get Our GST Software DEMO and E-WAY BILL DEMO for FREE

Importers do not need state-wise registration under GST regime

Importers do not need state-wise registration under GST regime

Importers with godowns or those which store goods at customs warehouses in different states got relief from the advance authority of ruling (AAR) under the goods and services tax (GST) regime.

The AAR, Maharashtra, in two recent rulings, said that these companies do not need a separate registration in each state and that a registration where their headquarters are located would be enough. These firms can sell products in different states and raise invoices against their head offices, it ruled.

Harpreet Singh, a partner at KPMG, said in one of the cases, the petitioner — Aarel Import Export —noted it has a head office in Mumbai and is exporter and importer of products such as black matpe, toor whole, pet coke, and agarbatti.

The applicant wished to import coke from Indonesia at Paradip port in Odisha. The item would be stored at Customs warehouse at the port. It wished to sell coke to customers in Odisha from the said warehouse but wanted to clear the bill against Mumbai office by paying customs duty, if any, and IGST.

The AAR held that no separate registration is required in Odisha. It also held that the place from where the applicant makes a taxable supply of goods shall be his location — Mumbai office in this case. Since the applicant does not have any godown or place of business in Odisha, it can clear goods on the basis of an invoice issued by the Mumbai headquarters. It also stated that the applicant can mention the GSTIN of Mumbai office in the e-way bill and dispatch place as Paradip Port.

In the other case, petitioner Gandhar Oil Refinery (India) Ltd said it carries out manufacturing activity from its plants located at Silvassa and Taloja in Maharashtra. The company is engaged in the trading activity of non-coking coal and carrying out businesses from many states. Here also, the AAR held that the applicant need not take separate registration in each state where the goods are imported and stored in godowns.


Ease Your GST Filing & Invoice with XaTTaX GST Software

Source: Business-Standard.
No GST at duty-free shops: HC

No GST at duty-free shops: HC

Multiple court rulings on payment of goods and services tax (GST) at duty-free shops are making life confusing for those buying perfumes and chocolates from these stores.

A recent Allahabad high court judgment may, however, provide some relief with the court ruling that there shall be no tax levied in case of purchases made at duty free stores at the arrival or departure terminals. The court held that tax will not be levied as the goods never cross customs border and passengers carry the items as their personal belonging.

The ruling is similar to the one by Karnataka high court where in case of Flemingo Duty Free Shop, it was held that sale or purchase by such stores would be a transaction in the course of export or import.

But what complicates matters is a ruling by the MP high court in the case of Vasu Clothing, where it held that the transactions were liable to GST as supply to a duty-free shop by an Indian supplier is not to “a place outside India” and therefore such supplies do not qualify as exports under GST.

Moreover, the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) had held that supply of goods to passengers going abroad from duty-free shops at Delhi International Airport is liable to GST. Alcohol, which is the most popular item at duty-free shops, is outside the ambit of GST.

“Applicability of GST on duty-free shops has been a perennial issue under the erstwhile VAT regime with multiple diverse rulings. The situation has not improved even under GST on account of diverse rulings by MP and Karnataka high courts. The new ruling seems to have rightly interpreted the provisions under the GST law as well as baggage rules to arrive at the conclusion which appears to be rational and in line with the legislative intent,” said Harpreet Singh, partner at consulting firm KPMG.

The Allahabad HC order came in response to a PIL filed by Atin Krishna on the grounds that the exchequer is losing revenue. The petitioner has argued that the respondent is liable to pay Central and state GST on the goods sold to international passengers at its departure terminal and is ineligible to get refunds of the accumulated input tax credit.

The respondents countered it saying that the supply of goods till they cross customs border should be considered as an inter-state supply under the integrated GST.

Ease Your GST Return Filing & Invoice with XaTTaX- GST Software

Source: Times of India.
GST Council may consider national bench of AAAR next month

GST Council may consider national bench of AAAR next month

The GST Council is likely to consider next month a proposal for setting up a national bench of the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR) to reconcile the contradictory orders on similar issues passed by AARs in different states, a move aimed at providing certainty to taxpayers.

Sources said the revenue department is mulling on the idea of a national bench of AAAR since it feels that the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) mechanism in its current form is not serving its objective of providing certainty to taxpayers under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime.

“There has been a view that a second Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling needs to be set up. It would be a national bench only to reconcile divergent verdicts passed by state AARs. We will present the proposal before the GST Council, which is expected to meet in June,” an official told PTI.

The AARs in different states have passed about 470 orders, while AAARs have disposed of around 69 cases till March 2019.

Out of the orders passed by AARs, contradictory orders were passed in about 10 cases, a couple of which were later clarified by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).

The official further said the GST law would have to be amended for setting up a second appellate authority since the Act in its present form does not provide for a centralised authority.

Setting up of a national bench of AAAR would help bring certainty in the GST era as divergent rulings by AARs leave the industry flummoxed about the tax implication of a particular business decision.

“The composition of the national bench of AAAR would be decided after the states agree to the proposal,” the official added.

In view of the confusion created by contradictory rulings, the revenue department had last year too mooted a proposal to set up a centralised appellate authority for advance ruling to bring uniformity in such cases.

The GST Council, chaired by Union Finance Minister and comprising state counterparts, was scheduled to discuss it in its meeting in July 2018. However, the council did not arrive at a decision on the agenda item.

Under the GST law, each state is required to set up an Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) comprising one member from the central tax department, and another from the respective state.

An aggrieved party can file an appeal against an order of the AAR to the AAAR within a period of 30 days, which may be further extended by a month.

The appellate authority has two members — the Chief Commissioner of Central Tax as designated by the CBIC and the Commissioner of State Tax.

The appellate authority has been mandated to pass order within 90 days of the filing of an appeal.

Industry is of the view that since both the AAR and AAAR only have tax officers as members, the ruling is most cases is tilted towards the revenue side.

The New Delhi bench of the AAR had in March last year held that duty-free shops at airports are liable to deduct GST from passengers. However, these shops were exempt from service tax and Central Sales Tax in the earlier regime. This had created a flutter in the industry.

Similarly, the solar industry too was left in a vexed situation when the Maharashtra AAR said that 18 percent GST rate would be levied for installation works, but the Karnataka bench of AAR passed an order levying 5 percent GST on the same.

Also, the AARs in Tamil Nadu and Gujarat had passed divergent orders on applicability of GST on catering services in an industrial/office unit, which was later clarified by the CBIC through a circular.

Besides, there were contradictory orders passed by AARs in different states on levy of GST on payment made by breweries to brand owner, availability of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on cess paid and also whether ITC is admissible when the recipient settles the payment through a book adjustment.

AMRG & Associates Partner Rajat Mohan said: “A National Bench/ Regional Benches needs to be implanted in the quasi-judicial decision-making process of AAR so that decisions of the lower authority could be re-calibrated by a higher centralised authority freeing them from revenue bias and passing on relief of certainty by preserving a nation-wide single line of verdicts.”

Source: Money Control.

XaTTaX is Best GST Software, Simplify your Financial matters with GST eFiling Software for Return Filing & GST Billing Software in India.

  • Automate Invoicing and get Paid Faster
  • Integration with all popular accounting software
  • Manage your GST and E-WayBill Software anytime anywhere using multiple devices

Get Our GST Software DEMO and E-WAY BILL DEMO for FREE