Latest news with #CentralGST
India.com
2 days ago
- Business
- India.com
No Plan To Levy GST On UPI Transactions Exceeding Rs 2,000: Centre
New Delhi: The government has reiterated that there is no plan to levy goods and services tax (GST) on unified payments interface (UPI)-based transactions exceeding Rs 2,000. Pankaj Chaudhary, Minister of State of Finance, said in the Rajya Sabha that "there is no recommendation of levying GST on UPI transactions of over Rs 2.000 from the GST Council'. Answering a question about whether the government is considering a proposal to levy GST on UPI transactions of over Rs 2,000, the minister told the House that GST rates and exemptions are decided on the basis of recommendations of the GST Council. The reply came after traders in Karnataka received GST demand notices based on UPI transaction data. Minister for Food, Public Distribution and Consumer Affairs, Pralhad Joshi, also said last week that the GST notices issued to small-scale traders in Karnataka are the doing of the state government, and not from the Central government. Responding to Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar's claim that the state has no role in issuing tax notices, Joshi called the statement 'utterly ridiculous.' 'It is Karnataka's commercial tax officials who issued the GST dues notices to small traders. And yet, the state government is now misleading the public by pretending it has no involvement. This is nothing but an attempt to shirk responsibility,' Joshi said. 'If the GST notices had been issued by the central government, then traders in several other states would have received them. But that hasn't happened anywhere else. Why are these notices being sent only in Karnataka?' Joshi questioned. He clarified that under GST, there are two components – CGST (Central GST) under the central government and SGST (State GST) under state governments. The notices to small traders in Karnataka were issued by the state's Commercial Tax Department.
Hans India
2 days ago
- Business
- Hans India
No plan to levy GST on UPI transactions exceeding Rs 2,000: Centre
New Delhi: The government has reiterated that there is no plan to levy goods and services tax (GST) on unified payments interface (UPI)-based transactions exceeding Rs 2,000. Pankaj Chaudhary, Minister of State of Finance, said in the Rajya Sabha that "there is no recommendation of levying GST on UPI transactions of over Rs 2.000 from the GST Council'. Answering a question about whether the government is considering a proposal to levy GST on UPI transactions of over Rs 2,000, the minister told the House that GST rates and exemptions are decided on the basis of recommendations of the GST Council. The reply came after traders in Karnataka received GST demand notices based on UPI transaction data. Minister for Food, Public Distribution and Consumer Affairs, Pralhad Joshi, also said last week that the GST notices issued to small-scale traders in Karnataka are the doing of the state government, and not from the Central government. Responding to Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar's claim that the state has no role in issuing tax notices, Joshi called the statement 'utterly ridiculous.' 'It is Karnataka's commercial tax officials who issued the GST dues notices to small traders. And yet, the state government is now misleading the public by pretending it has no involvement. This is nothing but an attempt to shirk responsibility,' Joshi said. 'If the GST notices had been issued by the central government, then traders in several other states would have received them. But that hasn't happened anywhere else. Why are these notices being sent only in Karnataka?' Joshi questioned. He clarified that under GST, there are two components – CGST (Central GST) under the central government and SGST (State GST) under state governments. The notices to small traders in Karnataka were issued by the state's Commercial Tax Department.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
7 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
Bet value doesn't qualify as income under I-T Act: Egaming firms to SC
The bet money placed by users in online real-money games (RMG) is neither accrued nor received by casinos and, therefore, should not be considered as income under the Income Tax Act, RMG intermediaries told the Supreme Court on Tuesday. As per the Income Tax Act, a consideration is defined by law as any sum or value that is either received or recoverable from a user or a client in return for a service that has either been provided or will be provided. Since online RMGs do not accrue or receive the monies deposited by users for themselves, it cannot be considered taxable income, the counsel for the companies told the Court. He further explained that when people play against the casinos, they settle with the winners and losers and then take whatever is left as surplus. "We are not valuing the bet but the right to win. It's a different concept from bet far as the face value of the bet is concerned, it belongs to the winner," he said. The court will continue hearing online RMGs' arguments until Friday. In the last hearing, the companies had argued that the GST provisions before October 2023 were inadequate to impose a 28 per cent tax on online gaming operators in the manner attempted by the authorities. The government's reliance on Rule 31A of the GST Rules (value of supply in case of lottery, betting, gambling, and horse racing), introduced in 2018, was challenged because it lacked statutory authority under the Central GST (CGST) Act, the companies had said. On Tuesday, online RMGs also contended that attempts to tax actionable claims like betting and gambling as 'goods' by amending the Goods Rate Notification were flawed. Until October 1, 2023, there was no entry for actionable claims in the Customs Tariff Schedule, making their classification as goods unsustainable under GST. The petitioners (online gaming companies) explained to the court the distinction between platform fees, on which GST is already paid, and prize pool contributions made by players, which are held in trust and returned to winners. They claimed that prize pool contributions do not constitute consideration and thus cannot be taxed under GST. In the case of online games, they argued that these games are played against each player, with the online gaming operator merely providing platform services, and that the platform operator, as the supplier of platform services, has discharged GST during the relevant period at the specified rate. The division bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan is hearing the case, which deals with the absence of clear taxing provisions to enforce tax collection before the October 2023 overhaul. The case, with an estimated financial impact of Rs 2.5 trillion, is one of the biggest tax battles in India's history. The matter will continue on Wednesday.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
7 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
Online RMGs tell SC bet money is not taxable income under Income Tax Act
The bet money placed by users in online real-money games (RMG) is neither accrued nor received by casinos and, therefore, should not be considered as income under the Income Tax Act, RMG intermediaries told the Supreme Court on Tuesday. As per the Income Tax Act, a consideration is defined by law as any sum or value that is either received or recoverable from a user or a client in return for a service that has either been provided or will be provided. Since online RMGs do not accrue or receive the monies deposited by users for themselves, it cannot be considered taxable income, the counsel for the companies told the Court. He further explained that when people play against the casinos, they settle with the winners and losers and then take whatever is left as surplus. "We are not valuing the bet but the right to win. It's a different concept from bet far as the face value of the bet is concerned, it belongs to the winner," he said. The court will continue hearing online RMGs' arguments until Friday. In the last hearing, the companies had argued that the GST provisions before October 2023 were inadequate to impose a 28 per cent tax on online gaming operators in the manner attempted by the authorities. The government's reliance on Rule 31A of the GST Rules (value of supply in case of lottery, betting, gambling, and horse racing), introduced in 2018, was challenged because it lacked statutory authority under the Central GST (CGST) Act, the companies had said. On Tuesday, online RMGs also contended that attempts to tax actionable claims like betting and gambling as 'goods' by amending the Goods Rate Notification were flawed. Until October 1, 2023, there was no entry for actionable claims in the Customs Tariff Schedule, making their classification as goods unsustainable under GST. The petitioners (online gaming companies) explained to the court the distinction between platform fees, on which GST is already paid, and prize pool contributions made by players, which are held in trust and returned to winners. They claimed that prize pool contributions do not constitute consideration and thus cannot be taxed under GST. In the case of online games, they argued that these games are played against each player, with the online gaming operator merely providing platform services, and that the platform operator, as the supplier of platform services, has discharged GST during the relevant period at the specified rate. The division bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan is hearing the case, which deals with the absence of clear taxing provisions to enforce tax collection before the October 2023 overhaul. The case, with an estimated financial impact of Rs 2.5 trillion, is one of the biggest tax battles in India's history. The matter will continue on Wednesday.
Mint
17-07-2025
- Business
- Mint
Simplify GST: It's time for a single all-India identification mandate
The goods and services tax (GST), which recently completed eight years in India, was originally envisioned as a 'good and simple tax." However, over time, it has become increasingly complex. While a national GST would have been an ideal value added tax (VAT) system, the imperatives of a federal structure led to a compromise, resulting in a dual GST system comprising Central GST (CGST), State GST (SGST) and Integrated GST (IGST). Under this system, the Centre and state governments have concurrent authority to tax the consumption of goods and services based on the principle of incidence at destination, in contrast with the previous indirect tax regime, which followed an origin-based taxation approach. Also Read: Ajit Ranade: A progressive GST is easier to promise than achieve While the uniformity of SGST laws across states has reduced compliance complexities compared to the VAT regime, challenges remain. Businesses with a pan-India presence still need multiple SGST registrations and must manage compliance separately for each state, including GST payments and return filings. This fragmented approach retains some of the administrative burdens of the VAT era despite the procedural standardization. Compliance burden: The Indian GST framework, often referred to as a 'one nation, one tax' system, has unified tax rates across states and Union territories (UTs), eliminating other taxes on goods and services under its scope. While this standardization simplifies the tax structure, businesses that operate across multiple states or UTs, as mentioned above, are required to obtain separate GST Identification Numbers (GSTINs) for each state or UT and file individual GST returns by using separate usernames and passwords for each jurisdiction. This has led to complex compliance procedures and a notable increase in related costs, especially due to the extensive reconciliations needed on a monthly and annual basis. Also Read: How India's GST revenues can sustain their incline On another front, the central government is working to address inter-governmental settlement issues related to IGST. Between April and July 2024, excess IGST allocations amounting to ₹10,659 crore were made to certain states. To resolve this, an internal committee has been set up that is chaired by the additional secretary of revenue at the Centre and comprises officials from both state and central governments. This panel aims to review the IGST mechanism and develop strategies for recovering these excess transfers. These developments highlight the operational complexities and financial implications associated with the implementation of GST, despite its overarching goal of creating a unified tax system. E-invoicing: The GST compliance process is largely digitized, with e-invoicing now mandatory for all business-to-business (B2B) transactions for taxpayers with an annual turnover exceeding ₹5 crore. There are plans to extend this requirement to all taxpayers and eventually to business-to-consumer (B2C) transactions. Once fully implemented, e-way bills should be eliminated. This move would significantly reduce the compliance burden for taxpayers and streamline operations, leading to faster turnaround times for transport vehicles and improved efficiency in the supply chain. Also Read: Mint Quick Edit | India's GST peak is reassuring PAN 2.0: The Union government recently unveiled plans to introduce PAN 2.0, an upgraded version of the longstanding Permanent Account Number system used by the Income Tax department as a unique taxpayer identifier. PAN 2.0 aims to modernize and streamline operations for businesses and citizens alike. The revamped system will leverage advanced technology to enhance efficiency, integrate PAN as a single identifier for specified business activities and introduce a unified portal for all PAN-related services. This presents an ideal opportunity to design a single GSTIN for taxpayers operating across India. Under this system, tax allocation can occur seamlessly at the back-end, using place-of-supply rules and data captured through e-invoicing. Such a framework would eliminate the need for an integrated GST administration across levels of governments under the GST Council. Since transaction-wise granular data would be available, GST revenues can be allocated equally between the Centre and states—and, on a destination-based principle, between states. Also Read: Simplify India's GST regime: The case for it is clear and it's time to act In this context, lessons can be learnt from the experience of other federal countries such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where a single VAT registration number is used for operations across all its constituent emirates. In the UAE, a unified VAT applies to intra-emirate, inter-emirate and import transactions without the need for separate registration in each emirate. India's next GST Council meeting should discuss this crucial aspect as well, since taking such simplification steps for GST compliance could significantly ease operational challenges for businesses and reduce administrative overheads, thus fostering economic growth by creating a more efficient and business-friendly tax regime. These are the authors' personal views. The authors are associated with the Pune International Centre (PIC), a think tank.
