2022 (9) TMI 1482 - HC - GST

Validity of Sl.No.9 (ii) of Notification No.8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017, and Sl.No.10 of Notification No.10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), dated 28.06.2017 - recipient as per Reverse charge mechanism - HELD THAT - The issue is no longer res integra and is covered in favour of the petitioners in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA ANR. VERSUS M/S MOHIT MINERALS PVT. LTD. THROUGH DIRECTOR 2022 (5) TMI 968 - SUPREME COURT where it was held that The IGST Act and the CGST Act define reverse charge and prescribe the entity that is to be taxed for these purposes. The specification of the recipient in this case the importer by Notification 10/2017 is only clarificatory. The Government by notification did not specify a taxable person different from the recipient prescribed in section 5 (3) of the IGST Act for the purposes of reverse charge. These Writ Petitions stand allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Notification No.8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) and Notification No.10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate).

Analysis:
The petitioners challenged Sl.No.9 (ii) of Notification No.8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) and Sl.No.10 of Notification No.10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate). Notification No.8/2017 specifies the rate of tax payable for services, particularly regarding the transport of goods in a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs station of clearance in India. The relevant portion of the notification outlines the conditions and rates for such services. On the other hand, Notification No.10/2017 imposes the liability to pay tax on a reverse charge basis by the recipient for specific categories of services, including services supplied by a person located in a non-taxable territory by way of transporting goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs station of clearance in India.

The issue was confirmed to be settled in favor of the petitioners by referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Mohit Minerals (P.) Ltd. The Supreme Court's decision clarified that the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act define reverse charge and specify the entity to be taxed for these purposes. The notification merely serves a clarificatory purpose and does not introduce a different taxable person from the one prescribed in the relevant sections of the Acts. As a result, the Writ Petitions were allowed, with no costs imposed, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.