CBDT exempts the following classes of Non-Residents from filing tax returns from the financial year 2020-21
i. Any non-resident not earning any income in India other than Income from Alternative Investment Fund- Category III and is not liable to obtain a PAN.
ii. An eligible foreign investor not earning any income in India other than capital gain from transfer of government security and is not liable to obtain a PAN. An eligible foreign investor means a non-resident who operates in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Board of India.
The above exemption will not be available if a notice has been issued for filing a return of income for a specified financial year.
The Madras High Court in the case of M/s Platinum Holdings Private Limited has held that SEZ developer is eligible to claim refund of unutilized input tax credit under Section 54 of the Central GST Act read with Rule 89 of the Central GST Rules. Revenue in this case had argued that, in terms of Rule 89 only a supplier to SEZ can file refund application and the said Rule does not explicitly permit recipient SEZ to claim refund. The High Court on perusal of provisions of Section 54 and Rule 89 observed that though the Rule 89 refers to a ‘supplier’ to file refund application, that by itself will not exclude, by virtue of such reference, recipient SEZ to file refund application. Section 54 allows “any person” to seek refund of taxes or other amounts paid under the provisions of the Act. Thus, on the legal issue of entitlement to refund, the High Court has held in favour of the assessee. However, the High Court remanded back the matter to verify that the suppliers have not filed refund claim in this case, and the Suppliers have indeed paid GST to the government treasury on supply to SEZ.
The Applicant in this case M/s Kanahiya Realty Private Limited is engaged in the business of supply of hosiery goods. The Applicant proposed to implement a promotional scheme to incentivize sale of hosiery goods amongst the retailers whereby it would offer unconnected goods (such as gold coins, refrigerators, coolers, split air conditioner etc.) for sale at a discounted price based on the targets achieved by the retailers. The retailers have the liberty not to purchase the goods offered under the said promotional schemes. The Applicant in this case raised two questions before AAR: First, whether supply of hosiery goods and promotional items would be considered as a mixed supply attracting highest rate of tax, and second, whether the Applicant would be entitled to claim input tax credit on promotional items which would be sold to retailers at a nominal price.
As regards the first question, the AAR has held that since the hosiery goods and promotional items will be sold under different invoices at different point in time at different price, the supply would not be considered as mixed supply. The supply of promotional items would qualify as individual supply taxable at the rate applicable to each such promotional item. However, AAR has held that the nominal/discounted price is not the sole consideration for supply of promotional items. According to AAR, the supply of the promotional items would be contingent upon the supply of hosiery goods, as the supply of promotional goods would take place only when the retailers meet the prescribed criteria stipulated under the promotional scheme. Should the retailers fail to achieve the target or do not opt for the scheme, there would be no supply of promotional items. Thus, the AAR observed that the nominal price is not the sole consideration for supply of promotional items. The value of promotional items is required to be determined in terms of Section 15 of the Central GST Act read with Rule 27 of the Central GST Rules.
As regards the second question on input tax credit, the AAR has held that the supply of promotional items is in the course or furtherance of business of the Applicant. Further, the Appellant would be charging nominal price to retailers for supply of promotional items and that too upon fulfilment of targets under the promotional scheme. Thus, the same cannot be considered as ‘gift’ and thus restriction under Section 17(5)(h) of the Central GST Act would not be applicable in this case. Therefore, the AAR has held that the Applicant would be eligible for input tax credit on promotional items.
The Applicant in this case M/s GRB Dairy Foods Private Limited are engaged in manufacture and supply of ghee and other products viz. masalas, instant mixes and sweets. With the objective of enhancing the market share, the Applicant launched promotional offer under the name “Buy n Fly’. Under this scheme, once the participating retailers achieve the targets, they would be eligible for rewards in the form of Trip to Dubai, Gold Voucher, Television, Air Cooler. The Applicant pays GST on procurement of these goods/services from Vendors. The Applicant claimed that they are eligible for input tax credit and restriction under Section 17(5)(h) of the Central GST Act would not be applicable in this case because they are not offering any gifts to retailers in this case. Rewards under the promotional offer cannot be equated with ‘gifts’. The AAR in this case noted that Section 17(5)(g) of the Central GST Act restricts input tax credit on goods/services used for personal consumption. In the instant case according to AAR, the promotional items are distributed to retailers for personal consumption. Further the fact that the cost of such promotional items is considered to arrive at the cost of the product is immaterial as credit on goods/services used for personal consumption is specifically restricted. Further, the AAR rejected the contention of the Applicant that the promotional items cannot be regarded as “gifts”. The AAR finally concluded that the Applicant is not eligible for input tax credit on procurement of inputs/input services under the promotional scheme “Buy n Fly’.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (‘MAS’) announced, on 29 October 2021, that its Cyber Security Advisory Panel had issued a number of proposals to strengthen cyber defences in financial institutions, following its fifth annual meeting. In particular, the panel advocated for the adoption of ‘zero trust’ security principles and architecture to tackle advanced cyber threats and IT supply chain attacks. Furthermore, the panel outlined various cyber risks and mitigating actions in emerging technologies such as blockchain and digital currencies.
As such, the panel recommended financial institutions to consider the following, among other things:
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (Resolution of Financial Institutions) Regulation 2018 (“Regulations”) have been amended from November 1, 2021 to provide for the contractual recognition requirement for qualifying pertinent financial institutions (“QPFI”) and their related entities to include enforceable provisions in their financial contracts which contain early termination rights where such contracts are governed by foreign law. The effect of the provisions is to have all parties to the contract agree that their exercise of termination rights will be subject to MAS temporary stay powers in the event of a resolution.
QPFIs will have three years from November 1, 2021 to make the necessary preparations to implement the contractual recognition requirement.
MAS will also be engaging the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (“ISDA”) to explore the possibilities of putting in place an ISDA Jurisdictional Module for Singapore, to support industry efforts.
Bank Indonesia (BI) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) today announced the extension of the USD10 billion bilateral financial arrangement to 4 November 2022. This arrangement has been endorsed by Indonesian President Joko Widodo and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, and will continue to support monetary and financial stability in both countries amid the on-going recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The arrangement comprises two agreements:
The bilateral financing arrangement was established between BI and MAS in November 2018 to build confidence in each other’s economies, following the Singapore-Indonesia Leaders’ Retreat. The arrangement has been extended annually since.
The Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) partnered with the tax community and government agencies to simplify Corporate Income Tax (CIT) Filing 2021 for companies. With the new initiatives, companies and tax agents can further reduce the time they take to file CIT this year. Companies are to e-File their CIT Returns (Form C-S/ Form C-S (Lite)/ Form C) by 30 November 2021.