Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date

Punjab and Haryana High Court also granted interim stay on GST demand on salaries paid to seconded employees in Indian Currency

Bimal jain
High Court Grants Interim Stay on GST Demand for Salaries to Seconded Employees Under Agreement with Japanese Parent Company The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted an interim stay on a GST demand related to salaries paid to seconded employees by a company, which had entered into an agreement with its parent company in Japan. Following a Supreme Court judgment clarifying manpower supply as a taxable service, the Revenue Department investigated the GST implications. The company paid GST and interest but was later asked to pay an additional amount. Disputing this, the company filed a writ petition, citing a similar case in Karnataka. The High Court issued a notice and stayed the proceedings against the company. (AI Summary)

M/s Mitsubishi Electric India Private Limited (“the Petitioner”) entered into a Secondment and Cost Reimbursement Agreement dated March 31, 2019, with Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Japan, the parent company wherein certain employees have been seconded for service in India.

Relying upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of C.C.,C.E. & S.T. – BANGALORE (ADJUDICATION) ETC. VERSUS M/S NORTHERN OPERATING SYSTEMS PVT LTD. - 2022 (5) TMI 967 - SUPREME COURT, wherein it was clarified that manpower supply service would be a taxable service w.e.f. May 19, 2022, the Revenue Department (“the Respondent”) initiated an investigation on August 11, 2022, regarding GST implications and conducted internal due diligence.

The Petitioner paid GST of INR 8,00,46,776 on the total amount of INR 44,47,04,312/- paid by the Petitioner to the parent company along with interest of Rs.2,79,80,800/- in compliance with the aforementioned judgement of the Supreme Court. Thereafter, the Respondent closed the proceedings initiated against the Petitioner without the issuance of a Show Cause Notice (“SCN”) as per Section 73(6) of the CGST Act leaving the rights open for investigation of remaining tax duties and liabilities and other issues for the similar period.

Further, the Respondent vide communication dated August 2, 2023, put Petitioner to notice as to whether proper tax along with interest has been deposited by the Petitioner on the Indian part of the payment made by the Petitioner for which the reply dated August 31, 2018, was filed by the Petitioner. The Respondent vide Order dated September 18, 2023, wherein the Petitioner was advised to pay the additional amount Rs.20,46,87,723/- along with applicable interest failing which SCN under Section 73(1) of the CGST Act, would be issued. The Petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated September 27, 2023, wherein the Petitioner raised the objection stating that the amount deposited in the Indian currency of the salary component was not covered and a closure letter has already been issued in favour of the Petitioner. However, the Petitioner was issued SCN dated September 29, 2023 (“Impugned Notice”) under Section 73(8) of the CGST Act, stating that no penalty in respect of tax and invoice, would be imposed if the amount of tax along with interest is paid within 30 days of issuance of Impugned Notice.

Aggrieved by the Impugned Notice and proceedings initiated by the Respondent, the Petitioner filed a Writ Petition [CWP 25351 of 2023] before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court.

The Counsel for the Petitioner contended that a similar issue has come up for consideration before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case M/S ALSTOM TRANSPORT INDIA LIMITED VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2023 (11) TMI 210 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURTwherein an interim order dated November 2, 2023, was passed, thereby holding that writ petition would be rendered infructuous if no interim protection is granted.

The Court vide Order dated November 9, 2023, issued a Notice of Motion and further stayed the proceedings initiated by the Respondent in pursuance of the Impugned Notice.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles