Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST registration cancellation without reasons amounts to ‘Economic Death’ of business: Supreme Court. *  No GST refund if appeal before GSTAT is filed late: Gujarat High Court. *  Mere upload of GST notice on portal not valid service, appeal limitation won’t start: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Taxpayer can’t be penalised for missing notices hidden under ‘Additional Notices/Orders’: Calcutta High Court allows fresh adjudication. *  State tax officer can’t issue GST SCN beyond CBIC-assigned jurisdiction: Bombay High Court stays recovery proceedings. *  Earlier 7.5% Pre-Deposit must count towards mandatory 10% for Appeal: Uttarakhand high court quashes CESTAT Order. *  Third Parties can’t challenge GST Advance Rulings merely due to financial impact: Karnataka HC *  GST SCN generated using AI tool quashed: Punjab & Haryana High Court *  Bank Attachment Quashed as Madras HC Quashes GST Order Issued Against Deceased Person *  ITC Blocking Order for Failure to Record ‘Reason to Believe’ U/R 86A Quashed: Allahabad High Court *  Govt Extends GSTAT Appeal Filing Deadline From 30 June to July 31, 2026 *  GST Demand on RWA Stayed: Allahabad High Court Questions Taxability of Electricity Distribution to Flat Owners *  CBIC Clarifies Jurisdiction After GST Registration Transfer: Earlier Proceedings Remain Valid, New Officer to Continue Action *  GST authorities’ certification not mandatory for reimbursement, but tax payment must be proven: Karnataka HC *  Contractor can’t seek gst reimbursement through writ when contract has arbitration clause: Karnataka HC *  Unsigned Order Is No Order in Law: AP HC Quashes GST Assessment Order for Want of Officer’s Signature *  Customs Can’t Levy Rs. 1.36 Crore Cost Recovery Charges Without Proof of Full-Day Officer Deployment: CESTAT  *  12% IGST Payable On Imported Dialysis Machine Parts: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Admits Challenge to GST Limitation Extension Notifications; Grants Protection Against Coercive Recovery *  Criminal Case Can’t Run Parallel to GST Proceedings on Same Facts: Allahabad High Court *  Allahabad High Court Stays GST Detention Order; Directs Release of Vehicle and Goods on Deposit of Rs. 1.44 Lakh *  Service Tax Can’t Be Levied on Loss-Making Contracts: Gujarat High Court *  GSTN Mandates Ship-to GSTIN in e-Invoice and e-Way Bill APIs; Introduces Voluntary e-Way Bill Closure Facility from August 1, 2026 *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred When Taxpayer Was Pursuing Rectification Remedy: Telangana High Court *  Absence of E-Way Bill and Transport Documents Justifies Customs Seizure U/s 110: Gauhati HC *  Madras High Court Upholds GST Late Fee and Penalty for Non-Filing of Annual Return, Dismisses Challenge  *  GST Records, Purchase Documents Sufficient to Discharge Burden Under Customs Act: CESTAT Orders Release of 3.65 Kg Gold  *  No Sugar Cess Payable on Sugar Exported Out of India: CESTAT *  Road Construction Services Exempt and SCN Time-Barred: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand Based Solely on Form 26AS  *  ITC Freeze Upheld After GST Dept Find Suppliers Were Allegedly Fake Bill-Trading Entities: Madras HC 
Subject News *  Input service benefits can’t be denied: CESTAT allows export refund despite MMTC acting as Canalising agency. *  No service tax demand without proof of service of SCN: CESTAT. *  Service tax demand quashed as dept. fails to prove service of SCN: CESTAT *  GST : Mere allegation of inadequate consideration of reply not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction: Delhi High Court *  Onerous conditions imposed for provisional release of seized imported goods shouldn’t amount to virtual denial of relief: CESTAT. *  GST SCN without alleging fraud cannot invoke sec. 74: Karnataka High Court quashes adjudication order. *  Extended Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Merely on Form 26AS Data: CESTAT *  Revenue-Sharing with Restaurants Not Taxable as Business Support Service: CESTAT *  R. 6(3) Option Can’t Be Forced on Taxpayer; CESTAT Quashes Rs. 12.36 Crore CENVAT Credit Demand *  Excise Duty | Power Consumption Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Manufacture: Karnataka High Court *  Madras High Court Examines DGGI’s Authority to Issue GST Penalty Orders Under Section 122, Adds DGGI as Party *  Proceedings under omitted r. 96(10) can’t survive without saving clause: andhra pradesh high court quashes gst refund recovery *  Excise duty power consumption alone can’t prove clandestine manufacture: karnataka high court *  Madras high court rules GST show cause notices must disclose grounds for invoking extended limitation *  Court Can’t Direct Extension GST Return Deadlines or Waive Interest and Penalties: Karnataka High Court *  GST Notifications Can’t Go Beyond GST Council Recommendations: Madras High Court Quashes SCN on Branded Pulses *  Appeal Can’t Be Dismissed for Delay When Dept’s Own Order Mis-states Limitation Period: CESTAT *  No Evidence of KYC or Due Diligence Breach By Customs Broker: CESTAT Quashes Licence Revocation in Export Overvaluation Case *  Glucometers Are Chemical Analysis Instruments Classifiable Under Tariff Heading 9027: CESTAT *  Validity of Post-GST Service Tax Proceedings Upheld: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Challenge to S. 73 SCN *  Rectified GST Refund Applications Can’t Be Rejected as Time-Barred If Original Refund Claim Was Filed Within Limitation: Gujarat HC *  Service Tax Refund Can’t Be Denied as Time-Barred When Levy Itself Is Unconstitutional: Gujarat High Court *  Same Officer Can’t Act As Auditor & Adjudicator: Karnataka High Court *  Karnataka High Court Condones 324-Day Delay, Revives Customs Appeal in Jewellery Pilferage Case  *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Order Passed Ex Parte Despite Prior ITC Reversal; Lifts Bank Attachment *  Tobacco Process Doesn’t Amount to Manufacturing: Madras High Court Quashes Rs. 1.32 Crore Compensation Cess Demand  *  Recovery Notice Unsustainable After Voluntary Reversal of Unutilised Credit: CESTAT  *  GST | ‘System Generated’ SCN Without Officer Details Invalid: Allahabad HC  *  Electronic Records Without Statutory Certification Requirements Can’t Justify Undervaluation Allegations: CESTAT *  Madras High Court Stays GST Order, Finds Prima Facie Merit in Plea Against S. 74 Proceedings Based on S. 73 Intimation  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE No 287 ON PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDED GSTR-3B PART-2

GST UPDATE No 287 ON PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDED GSTR-3B PART-2
The new format of GSTR-3B has been made applicable for the return filed for the month of August, 2022. In our earlier update, we have already highlighted some of the practical issues that are being faced by the assessees as regards presentation of data in the new format of GSTR-3B. 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.
We hereby discuss the various practical issues of presentation being faced by the assessees as follows:-
1. Treatment of rectification of invoice by the supplier which was wrongly reflected in GSTR-2B as it was not pertaining to the assessee:- At times, it happens that the supplier inadvertently uploads invoice in GSTR-1 under wrong assessee/GSTIN which results in reflection of invoice in the GSTR-2B of the wrong recipient. The reflection as regards invoice reflected in GSTR-2B but not
pertaining to the recipient has been dealt with in our earlier update. It is reiterated that the said ITC will be reflected in serial no. 4(B)(2) of the GSTR-3B. Now, the question arises is what would be the presentation when the supplier rectifies the mistake by amending the GSTR-1 wherein the taxable value and tax amount in the said invoice is amended as Zero. In such a scenario, it is being observed that the figure of all other ITC in serial no. 4(A)(5) of the GSTR-3B is auto-populated with reduced ITC. For example- invoice involving tax amount of Rs. 18,000/- was being wrongly reflected in the GSTR-2B of the recipient. Thereafter, the supplier amended the tax amount of the said invoice as zero due to which the auto populated ITC in table 4(A)(5) is being reflected with lesser amount by Rs. 18,000/-. The assessee will have to add back the amount of Rs. 18,000/- in serial no. 4(A)(5) as the said wrongly reflected ITC of Rs. 18,000/- has already been reversed by them under serial no. 4(B)(2) of the GSTR-3B filed for the prior period. This action will lead to deviation with the figure auto-populated in serial no. 4(A)(5) of the GSTR-3B.
2. ITC not available due to restriction contained in the Rate Notification:- It is submitted that the GST rate for certain goods or services is subject to the condition that the input tax credit shall not be availed by the supplier. For example- in case of restaurant services, GST rate of 5% is applicable subject to the condition of non availment of input tax credit. Now, the question arises is how to reflect the input tax credit which is being auto-populated in GSTR-2B of the restaurant supplier. The input tax credit will be auto-populated in the serial no. 4(A)(5) of the GSTR-3B. Now, the question arises is whether the reversal of said input tax credit will be reflected in table 4(B)(1) or 4(B)(2) of the GSTR-3B. The serial no. 4(B)(1) pertains to credit as per Rule 38, 42 and 43 of the CGST Rules and section 17(5) of the CGST Act, 2017. It is worth noting that the said input tax credit is not restricted under section 17(5) or any of the specified Rules so serial no. 4(B)(1) is not appropriate head for reflection of such ITC. Moreover, ITC at serial no. 4(B)(2) under the category “others” has been interpreted to mean the ITC which is to be re-claimed in future such as that pertaining to goods in transit or non-payment of consideration to the supplier of
goods within a period of 180 days from the date of issuance of invoice. It is submitted that as the input tax credit restricted under rate notification is not to be re-claimed in future, reflection of such credit under the serial no. 4(B)(2) of GSTR-3B is not appropriate. However, as there is no other option available for reflection of such input tax credit, the assessees will have to report the said ITC under serial no. 4(B)(2) of the new format. This will resultantly lead to raising of query by the department as the re-claimed amount of credit under serial no. 4(D)(1) would not tally with the figure reported in serial no. 4(B)(2) of the GSTR-3B.
It is hoped that the government issues suitable clarification to resolve various presentational disputes at the earliest possible so that proper compliance of filing GSTR-3B in the new format is being done by the assessee.
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