{"id":186686,"date":"2022-05-26T21:47:25","date_gmt":"2022-05-26T16:17:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.forumias.com\/?p=186686"},"modified":"2022-09-27T17:04:43","modified_gmt":"2022-09-27T11:34:43","slug":"answered-highlight-the-implications-of-mohit-minerals-judgment-on-the-fiscal-federalism-of-india","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/answered-highlight-the-implications-of-mohit-minerals-judgment-on-the-fiscal-federalism-of-india\/","title":{"rendered":"[Answered] Highlight the implications of \u2018Mohit Minerals\u2019 judgment on the fiscal federalism of India."},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n
Introduction: <\/span><\/b>Contextual introduction.<\/span>
\nBody:<\/span><\/b> Write some points related to implications of \u2018Mohit Minerals\u2019 judgment on fiscal federalism.<\/span>
\nWay forward: <\/span><\/b>Give some suggestions.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that the recommendations of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council only have persuasive value and <\/span>cannot be binding on the Centre and states<\/span><\/b>. The case- Union of India vs Mohit Minerals Pvt Ltd<\/span> was dealing with the levy of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) on ocean freight. The Supreme Court held that the levy constituted double taxation as the importer, which was already paying tax on the composite supply of goods, could not be asked to pay an additional tax on a perceived service that it may have received.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Implications on fiscal federalism:<\/span><\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n