Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update No 247 on SC granting last chance to file TRAN-1 by 31.10.2022

GST Update No 247 on SC granting last chance to file TRAN-1 by 31.10.2022
The implementation of the revolutionary tax reform being GST was not as smooth as was perceived as there have been number of disputes as regards the transition of erstwhile credit into the GST regime. With the passage of time, there had been plethora of cases wherein assessees have been denied the carry forward of the transitional credit into GST regime. This update seeks to discuss the latest decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA V/S FILCO TRADE CENTRE PVT. LTD. & ANR. which seeks to open the window for filing transitional return for all the assessees from 01.09.2022 to 31.10.2022. It is not the first time that the extension to file transitional credit to all the assessees has been granted by the Court by exercising their discretionary powers. On earlier occasion also, the hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of BRAND EQUITY TREATIES LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA had held that the period of 90 days for claiming input tax credit in TRAN-1 is directory and therefore, the period of limitation of 3 years under the Limitation Act would apply. The Delhi High Court had directed the department to allow all assessees to claim input tax credit in TRAN-1 by 30.06.2020. This decision was remarkable as it provided extended time limit for filing transitional credit to all the assessees. However, it appears that the tussle regarding carry forward of transitional credit is alive even after 5 years of GST implementation which has led to intervention by the Supreme Court on this matter. The hon’ble Apex Court has directed the GSTN to open the GST common portal for filing Tran-1 and Tran-2 for 2 months w.e.f 01.09.2022 to 31.10.2022 thereby allowing all the taxpayers to file their transitional returns irrespective of the fact that they have approached the Court of Law or not. The extended time period is also applicable for revising the already filed transitional credits. Furthermore, in past, various High Courts have allowed the assessees to file transitional returns after the expiry of time limit on the grounds that proof regarding technical glitches faced by them was produced. However, the present judgment does not require that the benefit is to be granted only if there was technical glitch faced by the assessee and rather the benefit is available to all the taxpayers unconditionally. The Supreme Court has also stated that the GSTN is under a liability to ensure that they are no technical glitch during the said time for filing the transitional credit. The concerned officers are given 90 days thereafter to verify the claim of transitional credit and pass appropriate orders on merits after granting appropriate reasonable opportunity to the parties concerned. The Apex Court also mentioned that the GST Council may also issue appropriate guidelines to the field formations in scrutinizing the claims, if required. It is worth mentioning over here that now the above stated judgement will grow as a benchmark for thousands of cases which are pending and brining them to a logical end. Further, the above decision supports the basic principle that legitimate credit earned by the taxpayers is their vested right and therefore, should not be denied and withdrawn merely because of procedural lapses. The above ruling has well established the principle of equality thereby treating all the taxpayers who have claimed or failed to claim credit at equal footings. The above decision has proved to be a silver lining in the clouds for the business houses. Although, it is worth noting that 5 years have passed down the road since inception of GST regime, yet the assessees are struggling to transition their credit of erstwhile regime to the GST era. However, the Apex Court should have also deliberated on the burning issue regarding claim of credit of tax paid under reverse charge mechanism after implementation of GST regime as there is no express provision to either avail input tax credit or claim refund in such scenarios. Although, there are favourable decisions rendered by High Courts that have allowed credit of such tax in electronic credit ledger of the assessee or have granted refund of the said amount to the assessee. Similarly, the issue regarding re-credit of the amount debited by the assessees for claiming refund under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which has been subsequently rejected post implementation of GST needs to be considered with possible remedy to the taxpayer. Nonetheless, since the facility to revise the transitional credit has been granted, the assessees should be allowed to report such peculiar transactions so that the legitimately earned credit is not being lapsed for absence of express provision in the statue.
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