Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Missing seized records must be considered while testing ITC claim; duplicate GST demands ordered corrected: Delhi High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be rejected without addressing taxpayer’s grounds: Allahabad High Court. *  Surplus IGST credit can offset CGST, SGST shortfall: GSTAT. *  GST refund can’t be denied when cancelled airfares are returned with tax: GSTAT. *  3 Hearing notices issued within 2 minutes: Gujarat High Court flags portal flaw, seeks report. *  GSTR-9, GSTR-9C filing for FY 2025-26 enabled; pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B must be filed first. *  Dupattas are exempt fabrics, can’t be taxed as fibres at 4%: Madras High Court. *  Full transitional credit allowed on capital goods received after GST rollout: GSTAT denies Rs. 6.99 lakh export duty credit. *  GST return mismatch alone can’t justify fraud proceedings: GSTAT orders fresh adjudication under section 73. *  Supplier found non-existent later can’t alone justify input tax credit denial: GSTAT. *  GST interest stops once tax reaches government account, can’t run until return filing: GSTAT. *  Cancelled flat booking- GST refund can’t be denied without excluding COVID period from limitation: GSTAT. *  India notifies rules of origin for India–New Zealand FTA. *  Incomplete E-bike kits classifiable as complete vehicles, but not eligible for CKD duty concession: CESTAT. *  Same GST rate on main input and output can’t by itself bar inverted duty refund: GSTAT. *  Unjust enrichment doesn’t apply to customs refunds from assessments finalised before July 13, 2006: Gujarat High Court. *  CENVAT credit can’t be denied solely because plant And machinery are embedded in earth: Karnataka High Court. *  DFIA exports ineligible for RoDTEP benefits; customs directs repayment with applicable interest. *  Second E-Way bill alone doesn’t prove another supply: GSTAT. *  Bail denied in Rs. 1.19 crore fake GST refund case over risk of accused absconding again: Punjab and Haryana High Court. *  GST registration can be restored after revocation deadline if outstanding dues are paid: Gauhati High Court. *  Multiple GST proceedings over same suppliers: Calcutta High Court directs dept. to share findings for adjudication. *  E-Governance portal services not OIDAR, fixed deposit interest not taxable: CESTAT. *  Rs. 500 Stamp duty required on authority letters for CAs, CMA and GST practitioners in Pune GST division.  *  Rs. 1.10 crore GST refund must be paid in cash after business closure: Allahabad High Court. *  Godown rent attracts 18% GST even when used exclusively for exempt agricultural warehousing: AAR. *  GST portal launches "Multi-State Registration" facility: one master TRN for registration applications across multiple States/UTs. *  RoDTEP scheme extended till 31st December, 2026.  *  Mere disagreement with order can’t override Rs. 20 lakh appeal limit: GSTAT. *  Customs interest can’t be backdated before confiscation liability is determined; nearly 8 year period excluded: Delhi High Court.
Subject News *  GST summons: anticipatory bail maintainable without arrest order, but relief denied in evasion case: Allahabad High Court. *  GST Appeal can’t be decided without hearing taxpayer’s objections to fresh evidence: Allahabad High Court. *  GST ITC can’t be reversed merely because supplier grants discount without reducing tax liability: GSTAT. *  Mere quoting of GST provision is not a valid charge: GSTAT quashes ITC denial. *  Personal hearing mandatory before adverse GST order, even without taxpayer’s request: Rajasthan High Court. *  Parallel bail pleas without full disclosure amount to abuse of process Rs. 43.08 crore GST case sent for fresh hearing: Supreme Court. *  GST refund based on unchallenged advance ruling can’t be recovered using later circular: GSTAT. *  Payment of GST alone doesn’t end interest and penalty liability when tax and interest remain unpaid beyond 30 days of notice: GSTAT. *  GST demand over builders’ 80% procurement rule requires reasoned adjudication: GSTAT. *  Eligible ITC doesn’t automatically entitle taxpayers to compensation cess refund on domestic sales: GSTAT. *  GST confiscation order passed before reply deadline invalid: GSTAT. *  GST interest can’t be retained after tax refund on delayed export receipts: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  GST appeal can’t be dismissed over pre-deposit shortfall without opportunity To respond: Bombay High Court. *  DGGI SCN can’t be challenged before reply and adjudication:Chhattisgarh High Court. *  GST input tax credit can’t be denied solely due to supplier’s retrospective registration cancellation: GSTAT. *  GST notice must explain fraud allegations; merely repeating section 74 Is not enough:  Himachal Pradesh High Court. *  Audit detection alone can’t justify GST fraud penalty; specific suppression must be proved: GSTAT. *  GST order uploaded only under ‘Additional Notices’ tab without separate intimation set aside: Calcutta High Court. *  Service Tax appeal can’t be rejected for missing pre-deposit proof when payment is already recorded: CESTAT. *  SGST dept. can’t hear appeal against CGST order: Calcutta High Court. *  Mere dispatch of tax order can’t prove service or make appeal time-barred: CESTAT. *  Dealer incentives can’t be taxed merely on ledger entries: CESTAT. *  DGFT orders quashed for failure to supply DRI letter relied upon in SCN: Bombay High Court. *  GST penalty u/s 122(1A) can’t apply to Pre-2021 transactions; unregistered beneficiaries also covered: Delhi High Court. *  Expired E-way bill caused by wrong PIN code can’t justify GST penalty without intent to evade tax: GSTAT. *  Used railway rails can’t be taxed as track material without proof they are fit for reuse: CESTAT. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand on different issue: Delhi High Court. *  ITC dispute involves no question of law: GSTAT directs appeal to Vice-President. *  Earlier DGGI notice doesn’t bar separate GST demand On different issue: Delhi High Court. *  No E-way bill required for interstate goods movement in november 2017: GSTAT quashes detention and penalty.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE NO 286 ON PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDED GSTR-3B

GST UPDATE NO 286 ON PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDED GSTR-3B
The new format of GSTR-3B has been made applicable for the return filed for the month of August, 2022. We have already highlighted the complexities and the increased compliance burden on the assessee due to revised GSTR-3B format requiring proper accounting and presentation of ineligible input tax credit. In the present update, we seek to point out various other practical difficulties being faced by the assessees while filing their GSTR-3B in the new format.
Before proceeding further, it is pertinent to briefly summarise the changes made in the revised GSTR-3B format. Serial no. 4(A)(5) of the GSTR-3B pertains to all other ITC which will have figure of credit auto-populated from GSTR-2B. Serial no. 4(B) comprises of the details of ITC reversed. Serial no. 4(B)(1) pertains to ITC reversed as per Rule 38, 42, and 43 of CGST Rules and section 17(5). Moreover, serial no. 4(B)(2) will comprise of other reversal of credit. The matter does not end here as the assessee is also required to furnish the other details in serial no. 4(D). As per serial no. 4(D)(1), details of ITC reclaimed which was reversed under table 4(B)(2) in earlier tax period is to be reflected while in serial no. 4(D)(2), ineligible ITC under section 16(4) and ITC restricted due to POS provisions is to be reported.
We hereby discuss the various practical issues of presentation being faced by the assessees as follows:-
1. Treatment of non-issuance of credit note by the supplier for sales returns/short receipt:- At times, it is observed that there is short receipt of goods or sales returns for which the supplier does not issue any credit note. Resultantly, the recipient issues debit note and reverses the applicable input tax credit. The question arises is how to reflect the said input tax credit in the revised GSTR-3B. As the credit note is not being reflected in GSTR-2B, the recipient assessee needs to voluntarily reverse the proportionate input tax credit. The recipient assessee will reverse the credit in serial no. 4(B)(2) of the GSTR-3B on the basis of debit note raised by it. However, there is no clarity as to the treatment when the supplier actually issues the credit note and the same is being reflected in GSTR-2B subsequently. In such a situation, theserial no. 4(A)(5) will be auto-populated with lower input tax credit in the month in which the credit note is being reflected by the supplier but in reality, the assessee had already reversed the applicable input tax credit in earlier GSTR-3B. Now, the question arises is whether the recipient assessee can make adjustment by including such credit in serial no. 4(A)(5) when the credit note is being reflected in GSTR-3B? Moreover, will the recipient assessee need to reflect such credit in serial no. 4(D)(1) simultaneously? This will require the assessee to keep track record of debit notes and credit notes that are being reflected in GSTR-2B which will be a herculean task. A suitable clarification needs to be issued to address this difficulty by the government at the earliest possible.
2. Invoice reflected in GSTR-2A does not pertain to the assessee:- It is possible that certain invoices that are being reflected in GSTR-2A do not pertain to the assessee. However, with the revised format in operation, even such credit which do not pertain to the assessee will be part of serial no. 4(A)(5) of the GSTR-3B. Consequently, the assessee will reflect the said credit in serial no. 4(B)(2) as other credit reversal. But as per interpretation, this column stands for the credit to be claimed later on. But this credit is not to be claimed by taxpayer , hence a view is formed that it should be shown in 4(B)(1). But this is for specific clause of Rule, 42 and 43 of CGST Rules and Section 17(5) of CGST Act. Hence, it should be shown A(B)(2) only. This should be clarified by the department.
3. Invoice not received but the input tax credit reflected in GSTR-2B:- It is submitted that as input tax credit can be availed only when the assessee is in possession of valid GST invoice, the said credit will be reflected in serial no. 4(A)(5) of the GSTR-3B. Consequently, the assessee will reflect the said credit in serial no. 4(B)(1) if it is certain that the credit is ineligible. However, if the assessee is not sure whether the credit is eligible or ineligible, the said credit will be reflected in serial no. 4(B)(2) as other credit reversal. However, on receipt of valid GST invoice, such credit will have to be reflected in serial no. 4(A)(5) and 4(D)(1) if the credit is under eligible category. Again the ambiguity raised in earlier point will be raised. Hence, a suitable clarification from CBIC is solicited.
4. Invoice pertains to July month and reflected in GSTR-2B of July month but omitted from claiming in GSTR-3B:- There may be situation that invoice for the month of July, 2022 was omitted
from claiming in GSTR-3B which is now being claimed in the month of August, 2022. However, the said invoice was already reflected in GSTR-2B of July, 2022 and was also booked in the accounts of assessee. In such a case, the assessee will have to report the input tax credit pertaining to the said invoice in serial no. 4(A)(5) of the GSTR-3B of August, 2022. Moreover, the said credit also needs to be reflected in serial no. 4(D)(1) of the GSTR-3B as the inflated credit of serial no. 4(A)(5) needs to be re-conciled by the assessee. This is on the assumption that the assessee is in a way re-claiming the said input tax credit in the month of August, 2022 which was reflected in GSTR-2B of July month but could not be claimed for clerical mistake. It is to be assumed that omission is as good as reversing the said credit, similar to the situation of goods in transit. Although, some experts may opine that such an interpretation would lead to retrospective application of the new format which is not legally valid. A suitable clarification is needed from the government on this point.
5. Invoice pertains to June, 2022 but reflected in GSTR-2B of August, 2022 and booked in the month of August, 2022:- There may be situation that supplier has filed belated GSTR-1 for an invoice pertaining to the month of June, 2022 due to which the credit pertaining to the said invoice is being reflected in GSTR-2B of August, 2022. As the said invoice was not reflected in GSTR-2B for the month of June, 2022, the assessee did not record the said credit in their books of accounts. Now, the assessee will have to report the said credit pertaining to invoice raised in the month of June, 2022 in serial no. 4(A)(5) of the GSTR-3B. However, it is not required to reflect such credit in serial no. 4(D)(1) of the GSTR-3B because the said credit was not accounted for by the assessee in their books of accounts earlier.
The above problems are only illustrative and the actual difficulties will be encountered when the GSTR-3B returns are being regularly filed in the new format. It is hoped that the government issues suitable clarification to resolve various presentational disputes at the earliest possible so that objective of ease of doing business is achieved.
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