CA Vishalkumar Kapuria
Chartered Accountant
[ Scorecard : 36]
|
Posted On 23 December 2010 at 20:15
|
X has a Head Office in Mumbai & Branch in Ahmedabad
If X - Ahmedabad transfer Stock of1000/- + VAT 50/- = 1050/- to X - Mumbai by Branch Transfer @ 1,000/- (i.e. Cost Price)
Please Guide me whether50/- Input VAT Credit will be available to X - Ahmedabad or not
If Yes then What Amount ?
Thank You
|
|
|
U S Sharma
glidor@gmail.com
[ Scorecard : 19285]
|
Posted On 23 December 2010 at 20:46
|
no credit available in this case !!
|
|
|
|
Tharun Raj
CMA
[ Scorecard : 985]
|
Posted On 23 December 2010 at 22:38
|
Tax treatment under VAT for Stock transfer:
§ Stock transfer is not a sale and there is no VAT liability
§ The Input tax credit with respect to
i) Inputs used in manufacture of finished goods which are then transfer
ii) Goods purchased which are then transferred
Is available after retention of 4% of such tax by the state governments.
Total thanks : 1 times
|
|
|
Shivam
CA Final student
[ Scorecard : 153]
|
Posted On 23 December 2010 at 22:40
|
frenz
1 of the restaurent ownr is charging VAT on fooodings item @ 13.5%
is dis ryt......... i think it should be 12.5%
|
|
|
suraj yadav
Sr. Accounts Executive
[ Scorecard : 62]
|
Posted On 24 December 2010 at 10:32
|
If Branch transfer is agianst Form " F " , Input tax credit only upto 2 % should be reveresed and balance input tax credit can be used .In given case Rs. 20 should reveresed and balnce of Rs. 300 will be avillable to X - Ahmedabad.
|
|
|
ESHAN
job
[ Scorecard : 97]
|
Posted On 24 December 2010 at 12:18
|
DEAR VISHAL SIR , IN MY OPINION , BRANCH TRANSFER IS NT A SALE N CREDIT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE BRANCH WHICH HAS ACTUALLY SOLD THE GOODS ..THEREFORE IF SALE IS BEING MADE AT MUMBAI THEN MUMBAI H.O. SHOULD AVAIL THE INPUT CREDIT.
|
|
|
Binod Kumar Sinha
COMMERCIAL DEPARTMENT
[ Scorecard : 133]
|
Posted On 24 December 2010 at 12:46
|
Dear Mr. Vishal ,
In case of stock transfer there is no question arise for credit and also stock transfer will be made for cost price only.
When Stock transfer is treated as Inter state sales: When goods are dispatched to Branch office or consignment agent in other state and thereafter these goods are sold from the branch office or by the consignment agent then it is not a sales and is stock or branch transfer hence no CST liability arises.
However, if the movement of goods is occasioned on account of sales, the movement will be treated as interstate sales. It can be explained with an example
Suppose the dealer A registered in Punjab who manufactures some goods and send these goods after manufacturing to its branch office situated at Delhi wherefrom the goods are sold in Delhi. Now the movement of goods from Punjab to Delhi will be treated as stock transfer or branch transfer and for which no CST liability arises and F form will be issued by Delhi Branch to Punjab dealer.
But if a person B in Delhi wants to purchase some goods of special descripttion which is not normaly manufactured by A and Mr B places order with A in Punjab for manufacturing special descripttioned goods. Now if A manufactures such ordered goods and send them to its branch at Delhi then such movement will be an interstate sales and not a branch transfer since the movement of goods was due to a predetermined contract of sales.
Thus where goods were sold through branch, but buyer was known and identified before goods were dispatched from factory. Obviously this was held as inter state sales and not a stock transfer- Electric Construction and Equipment Co. Ltd. V State of Haryana- (1990) 77 STC 424 (P&H HC DB)
In South India Viscose Ltd. v. State of Tamilnadu-(1981) 48 STC 232 (SC)= AIR 1981 SC 1604 it was held that if there is a conceivable link between contract of sale and the movement of goods from one state to another in order to discharge the obligation under the contract of sale, the interposition of the agent of seller who may temporarily intercept the movement will not alter the interstate character of the sale.
|
|
|
Vikash Kumar
Manager Accounts (CA. Final)
[ Scorecard : 665]
|
Posted On 24 December 2010 at 14:05
|
Mr. Suraj is right. only 2% cst liability will be reversed agaisnt input credit.
|
|
|
Avantika Mishra
Audit Assistant
[ Scorecard : 89]
|
Posted On 24 December 2010 at 20:19
|
|
Originally posted by : Shivam |
 |
frenz
1 of the restaurent ownr is charging VAT on fooodings item @ 13.5%
is dis ryt......... i think it should be 12.5% |
 |
yaar that extra 1% is SAT.. Special Additional Tax
|
|
|
Binod Kumar Sinha
COMMERCIAL DEPARTMENT
[ Scorecard : 133]
|
Posted On 25 December 2010 at 11:45
|
Dear,
The VAT of foodgrain items already raised to 13.5% from the previous 12.5% by an ordinance in November in West Bengal and Haryana, that why the restruent owner has charged VAT @ 13.5%
|
|
|