Discussions Forum | ||||||
Home Forum Goods and Services Tax - GST This
A Public Forum.
Submit new Issue / Query
My Issues
My Replies
|
||||||
Regarding Anti Profiteering, Goods and Services Tax - GST |
||||||
|
||||||
Regarding Anti Profiteering |
||||||
Dear Sirs, We had received a Purchase Order for supply of IT Hardware goods in February 2017. With the delivery Date being 05/07/2017. The Purchase Order Had Expired after this date due to site readiness issues at the customer end. The Purchase order was amended so that the delivery can be carried out. The revised purchase order mentioned SGST 9% and 9% CGST applicable with the purchase price remaining the same. Based on this the materials were delivered to the customer on 19/03/2018. While we had submitted our invoice for payment realization, the customer has with held the Tax component and released the base value of the product. The reason behind it is they would want credit for CVD and SAD components as the PO was placed during the VAT regime. Request you to please advise on the validity of this demand by the customer and his holding of the taxes. On our part since they had issued a revised PO we had purchased the goods under the GST regime for the whole chain (Supplier, Distributor and Importer) Please let us know if the customer is correct in his claim that it attracts anti profiteering clause. Warm regards, Posts / Replies Showing Replies 1 to 3 of 3 Records Page: 1
Anti-profiteering applies in cases where the amount of tax is in-built in the price and the credit of the same is now being allowed due to introduction of GST. Such benefit is required to be passed on. In your case, since the entire transaction is under GST, the taxes would not be forming part of the cost and thus are not required to be passed on.
Dear Sir, Per Se, it appears that the contention of your customer will not hold good and following are the reasons ,
(However if you have taken CVD and SVD Credit in trans 1, then please reduce the price by giving credit note to customer to that Extent).
Comments From esteemed members highly solicited
He would have claimed cvd and sad thru tran1. So he should not withheld the said tax component. This is my view. Page: 1 Old Query - New Comments are closed. |
||||||