Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update No 235 on circular issued for fake invoices

GST Update No 235 on circular issued for fake invoices
The GST law was introduced to make compliances digitized so that the cases of fake invoices could be eliminated. The implementation of the concept of e-way bill and e-invoices is an initiative in this regard. However, the disputes related to instances of “invoice without supply” or “supply without valid GST invoice” are commonly observed. It is observed that in fake invoice cases, often the revenue department slaps show cause notices to every supplier in the credit chain but whether recovery of demand of tax is to be made from each of the supplier is the moot question which remains unanswered. Recently, CBIC has issued a CIRCULAR NO. 171/03/2022-GST DATED 06.07.2022 clarifying applicability of demand and penalty provisions on the transactions involving fake invoices. The present update seeks to discuss the aforesaid circular.
 
The recent circular discusses applicability of penalty and demand provisions on following issues in respect of fake invoices issued by one registered person to another, thereby highlighting the consequences of “invoice without supply”: -
 
1.      Registered person “A” issues tax invoice to registered person “B” without supply goods. Whether the transaction be treated as “supply” under Section 7 of CGST Act, 2017 and whether any demand, recovery and penal actions can be initiated against “A”- It is clarified by CBIC that since only tax invoice is issued by “A” to “B” without any actual supply of goods, the above   transaction does not fall under the definition of supply under Section 7 of CGST Act, 2017. Since there is no supply, no tax liability arises against “A” and accordingly, no demand and recovery can be initiated against “A” in accordance with provisions of Section73 and 74 of CGST Act, 2017. However, he shall be liable for penal action under Section 122 of CGST Act,2017.
 
2.      Registered person “A” issues tax invoice to registered person “B” without supply goods. “B” availed input tax credit on the basis of tax invoice and utilised the same against discharging output tax liability. Whether “B” will be liable for demand and recovery of ITC along with penal action under Section 73 and 74 of CGST Act, 2017 – It is clarified that “B” has availed and utilised ITC fraudulently without actual receipt of goods and thereby contravened the provisions of Section 16(2)(b) of CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, he shall be liable to pay back wrongly availed ITC under Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017 along with applicable interest under Section 50 of CGST Act, 2017. Furthermore, as per Section 73(13) of CGST Act, 2017, if penal action is initiated against Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017, no penalty can be imposed under Section 122 of CGST Act, 2017.
 
3.      Registered person “A” issues tax invoice to registered person “B” without supply goods. “B” availed input tax credit on the basis of tax invoice and passed on ITC to “C” by issuing invoice without supply of goods. Whether demand and penalty can be initiated against “B” under Section 73 or 74 of CGST Act, 2017- The CBIC seeks to clarify that no tax liability is attracted on “B” since there is no supply of goods to “C”. However, ‘B’ shall be liable for penal action both under section 122(1)((ii) and section 122(1)(vii) of the CGST Act, for issuing invoices without any actual supply of goods and/or services as also for taking/ utilizing input tax credit without actual receipt of goods and/or services.
 
The above circular seeks to clarify various instances of fake invoices and consequences to be faced by the parties dealing in fake invoices.  Although it is well settled that in case due diligence has been exercised appropriately by the recipient taxpayer and goods have been further supplied under the cover of proper invoice, no penal action can be taken against the bonafide taxpayer. This is backed by various judicial pronouncements such as decision of Orissa High Court in the case of M/S BRIGHT STAR PLASTIC INDUSTRIES V/S ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX (APPEAL) & ORS. The above clarification is a sigh of relief for the taxpayers as far as the confusion regarding recovery of tax along with interest is concerned from the recipient in the supply chain because it appeared that department would recover the tax along with interest from all the persons in the supply chain. It is hoped that the clarification issued by this circular is scrupulously followed by the departmental authorities. 
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com