1. Is it possible to amend/rectify the error in Form GST TRAN-1?
Assessee had opening stock on beginning of GST, to avail input tax credt(ITC) Rs.8,27,000/-, reported stock details in Form GST TRAN-1 under column 7(d) instead of 7(b) and the same was not reflected in column-4 of Form GST TRAN-2, thereby, assessee had submitted representations before the GST Authorities requesting to rectify the above-said error but same was not considered. Hence, aggrieved by that assessee had filed a writ petition requesting directions to give an opportunity to rectify the Form GST TRAN-1.
Contention of the revenue that a Nodal Officer has already been appointed for redressal of grievances and assesse should approach/file a representation before the Nodal Officer.
Assessee was directed to approach respective Nodal Officer and make representations, on receipt of such representation/request said Nodal Officer who shall consider same and pass appropriate orders on merits.
[Refer: Calcutta Canvas Co. Vs. UOI –  76 GST 907/110 taxmann.com 294(Madras High Court)]
2. Reimbursement of freight charges whether liability arise under service tax?
Facts: Assessee selling goods to dealers for price inclusive of freight charges, which were reimbursed by asssesee later, dept. has issued a show-cause notice contending service tax not paid on freight charges.
Discussion & Decision:
Freight charges/amount reimbursing by assessee to the dealer on sale of goods were liable for payment of service tax, SLP was dismissed upholding the decision of lower authorities.
[Refer: Nirmal Seeds (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE ( 110 taxmann.com 123(SC) /  76 GST 480 (SC))]
3. Can offline Form GST TRAN-1 can be accepted, if it is filed within 31.12.2019/extended due date?
In view of the extension of due date(upto 31.12.2019) for filing Form GST TRAN-1 on account of technical difficulties, vis-à-vis amendment by insertion of sub-rule 1A to Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, 2017, assessee approached HCrequesting to give directions to acceptForm GST TRAN-1 offline.
Amendment of sub-rule 1A of Rule 117 has been misconstrued, it is applicable to those registered persons, who have failed to furnish Form GST TRAN-1 due to technical fault in the server or technical glitch while uploading Form GST TRAN-1.Petitioner has neither made any assertion/attempt to upload his Form GST TRAN-1/request to GST council about the date/point of time, when it made, nor has it placed any documentary evidence.
Direction to the respondent to permit the petitioner to submit offline GST TRAN-1 form, if the petitioner’s assertion is found correct and met/satisfied all the conditions as under –
i. the assessees failed to upload his GST TRAN-1 form on account of technical glitches on the common portal;
ii. such attempt was made during the currency of the transitional period i.e.,22-12-2017; and
iii. the GST council has made a recommendation for such extension, being satisfied about such failure.
[Refer: Jodhpur Truck Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI – 2020(32) GSTL 172 (Raj. High Court)]
4. Whether delayed payment charges liable under GST? – [Refer: SPFL Securities Ltd. (AAR- Uttar Pradesh)].
Assessee is, a stock broker, engaged in the business of purchasing and selling of shares on behalf of clients on Stock Exchange, the client makes delay in reimbursing of payment paid for purchase of securities from the stock exchange beyond the statutory time limit(i.e.Trading day +1 day for payment as per SEBI regulations/norms). Client failed to pay the amount paid to Stock Exchange, accordingly, sought ruling for liability to pay GST on the delayed payment charges on reimbursement of the above amount paid to Stock Exchange.
Since the service of buying and selling of securities were exempt under GST, in terms of Section 2(52) and 2(102) of CGST Act, 2017, accordingly, delayed payment charges is exempted, i.e. assessee not liable to pay GST on delayed payment charges collected from clients.
5. Whether recovery of from employees is supply? –[Refer: Jotun India (P) Ltd. (AAR Maharashtra)].
Assessee, is the manufacturer of paints, introduced Parental Health Insurance Scheme for employees’ parents, as per scheme it initially pays entire premium to insurance company and thereafter recovers 50 percent of premium amount from employees and balance 50 percent is borne by assessee. Assessee sought ruling on recover of premium amount from employees amounts to supply of service.
Discussion & Ruling:
Recovery of 50 percent of premium from employees does not amount to supply of service under section 7 of the CGST Act, as the assessee is not engaged in the business of providing insurance coverage, activity done cannot be treated as an activity in the course of business or in furtherance of business.
Disclaimer: It’s purely for information/educational purpose, obtain the professional advisefor any choice inthis regard.