Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Service tax penalty can’t survive when assessee acted on dept.’s own view of non-taxability: Delhi High Court. *  GST section 74 extended limitation questionable when form 26AS mismatch was already known: Karnataka High Court grants interim relief. *  CGST demand prima facie impermissible after state GST settlement under section 128A: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court asks GSTAT to sympathetically consider delay as taxpayers pursued remedy before wrong forum. *  Supreme Court stays Tripura High Court ruling protecting genuine buyers from ITC denial over supplier’s GST default. *  Diary entries alone can’t prove clandestine removal of goods: CESTAT quashes excise penalty on steel trader. *  Customs could investigate preferential tariff claims even before sec. 28DA: Delhi High Court. *  Customs dept. relied on fake AI generated case laws: supreme court quashes Rs. 425.28 crore penalty. *  No GST exemption in affiliation and annual registration charges for admission or conduct Of examinations: GSTAT. *  Mere invoices, cheque payments insufficient to establish genuine movement of goods: GSTAT restores Rs. 43.44 lakh ITC demand. *  Consolidated GST show cause notice covering multiple financial years is not without jurisdiction: Delhi High Court. *  Construction of independent houses on separate plots not taxable as ‘Residential Complex’ without common facilities: CESTAT. *  GST penalty exceeding statutory maximum unsustainable; Allahabad High Court quashes ? 50,000/- penalty after taxpayer filed return and paid late fee. *  GST order against standard chartered bank passed without hearing set aside by Bombay High Court. *  Retracted statements can’t be relied upon without cross-examination: CESTAT quashes gold confiscation. *  Burden to prove misclassification lies on customs department: CESTAT. *  CESTAT quashes Rs. 98 lakh excise demand on clearance of used refractory brick scrap. *  Service tax demand on irrigation works quashed: Karnataka High Court rules sale of goods component not taxable as service. *  GSTAT restores tax and penalty for transporting iron scrap without E-way bill citing intent to evade tax. *  Madras High Court stays GST recovery from directors without opportunity to show cause under section 89. *  Madras high court stays GST recovery notice against directors; finds prima facie case on applicability of section 79(1)(c). *  Procedural lapses can’t justify harsh punishment without serious customs breach: CESTAT quashes customs broker licence revocation. *  Service tax payable on land leasing and sports complex charges: CESTAT. *  Settled customs dispute can’t be reopened through Article 226 challenge to interest liability: Delhi High Court. *  Mere facilitation of customs clearance can’t establish knowledge of smuggling: Madras High Court. *  GST registration cancellation stayed: Allahabad High Court questions 99% ITC utilisation cap under rule 86B. *  Composition scheme lapses automatically on crossing Rs. 1.5 crore turnover: GSTAT. *  Gujarat High Court quashes GST cancellation orders after officer relied on non-existent AI-generated case laws. *  Importers liable for customs duty benefits availed through manipulated scrips: Delhi High Court. *  Procedural E-way bill lapse alone can’t justify penalty where genuine transaction and absence of tax evasion are established: GSTAT.
Subject News *  Documentary evidence dominates probe, further custody unwarranted: mumbai court grants bail in Rs. 22.44 crore customs duty evasion case. *  Business premises can’t remain sealed for non-participation in GST search: Allahabad High Court. *  GST pre-deposit must be refunded proportionately when taxpayer partly succeeds in appeal: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court grants 30 days to file GST appeal; keeps pre-deposit issue open due to deposit in parallel CGST proceedings. *  GST demand can’t exceed amount proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore order. *  Hundreds-of-crores GST demand and heavy 10% pre-deposit no ground to bypass statutory appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Delhi High Court refuses to entertain challenge to gold confiscation due to statutory appeal remedy and unexplained delay. *  Procedural error in customs broker licence inquiry can be rectified through remand: Delhi High Court. *  GSTR-2A mismatch alone can’t justify ITC denial without invoice-wise verification; personal hearing mandatory: GSTAT. *  GST order passed without uploading personal hearing notices violates sec. 75(4): Allahabad High Court. *  TAX EVASION - Sec. 74 GST SCN quashed for not spelling out fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression: Allahabad High Court. *  STPI’s SOFTEX certification and NoC charges taxable as business support services: CESTAT. *  Suspicion can’t replace proof: CESTAT quashes penalty in alleged gold-smuggling operation. *   Limitation runs from communication of order: Madras High Court upholds rejection of delayed GST Appeals. *  Rajasthan High Court quashes GST demand over unsigned show cause notice. *  ITC recovery upheld where supplier failed to deposit GST: Rajasthan High Court. *  Customs commissioner’s empowered to make port trust liable for duty on pilfered goods: Supreme Court. *  Rectification proceedings can’t be used to challenge an uncontested GST assessment through a writ petition: Andhra Pradesh HC. *  GST proceedings against deceased proprietor unsustainable without notice to legal heir: GSTAT. *  Mere availment of ineligible self-assessed ITC doesn’t amount to suppression without evidence of fraud or wilful misstatement: GSTAT. *  Disposal of mining overburden by entity authorised by mining lease holder constitutes taxable service: CESTAT. *  Toll plaza data not mandatory for ITC refund: GSTAT. *  Disputed GST fraud allegations require investigation: Punjab and Haryana High Court makes interim bail absolute in alleged fraud and GST fraud case. *  Non-manufacturer contractor liable to deposit excess excise duty collected from buyer: CESTAT. *  GST order can’t reject taxpayer’s reply as “not satisfactory” without reasons: Madhya Pradesh High Court. *  Uncorroborated statements can’t establish alleged diversion of duty-free goods: CESTAT. *  Erection services were not liable to service tax prior to 10th september 2004: CESTAT. *  Sec. 74 GST notice must spell out statutory ingredients for invoking extended tax demand proceedings: Allahabad High Court. *  No jurisdictional bar under section 6(2)(b) in parallel CGST SGST proceedings: Delhi High Court refuses to bypass GST appeal remedy. *  Madras High Court remits GST demand for fresh adjudication after taxpayer claims it was unaware of SCN following business closure.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE ON ANNUAL RETURN COMPLIANCE-PART-1

GST UPDATE ON ANNUAL RETURN COMPLIANCE-PART-1
GST UPDATE ON ANNUAL RETURN COMPLIANCE-PART-1
 
As we all know that all registered assesses under GST Law are required to comply with the filing of Annual Return by 30.06.2019. The details required in annual return requires extensive compilation. Moreover, the amendments made in the format of Annual Return have raised several doubts as regards the presentation of appropriate information in relevant columns in light of practical complications. The series of update are being prepared to help the assesses in best possible manner and try to resolve the confusions prevailing as regards presentation of information in the annual return.
 
The government has also released instructions for filing the annual return but detailed clarifications are expected from the government so as to facilitate the assessees to correctly present the desired information under relevant tables of the format. At the outset, we wish to point out that the instructions indicate the source of information that is to be derived for various serial numbers, and at most of the places except pertaining to input tax credit details, reference is being made to GSTR-1. However, it is worth noting that while filing annual return, the details of various tables of GSTR-1 are to be considered, PROVIDED TAX has been discharged from GSTR-3B filed by the assesses. Consequently, the base for filing annual return will be GSTR-3B as tax liability is discharged through this return while GSTR-1 is only informative. Furthermore, the assessee is also required to ensure that correct figures are being reported in the annual return in case there was error in reporting information in GSTR-3B filed by him as the assessee is required to report “details of outward supplies made during the financial year” and not “declared during the financial year”. The above discussion clearly reveals the caution to be exercised while filing annual return by the assessee. We intend to discuss the compliances to be made by the assessee while filing annual return in the next series of our updates and we hope that the same is useful to our netizens.
 
We hereby discuss the details required to be furnished in part A of serial no. 4 of the annual return “Details of advances, inward and outward supplies made during the financial year on which tax is payable”.
4A Supplies made to un-registered persons (B2C):
The assessee is required to submit the details of B2C supplies net of debit notes and credit notes along with amendments made in such supplies during the financial year 2017-18. Important point to note is that assessee is not required to consider amendments made in the GSTR-1 filed for the months of April, 2018 to September, 2018 with respect to financial year 2017-18 while filing amount in this table. This can be better explained with following situations:-
Situation No. 1-Assessee made B2C supplies of Rs. 5,70,000/- during July, 2017 to March, 2018 with credit notes of Rs. 20,000/- raised in the month of February, 2018 which were duly accounted for in GSTR-3B filed for the month of March, 2018. In such a scenario, the amount to be considered for filing 4A shall be Rs. 5,70,000/- Less Rs. 20,000/- = Rs. 5,50,000/-
Situation No. 2-Assessee made B2C supplies of Rs. 5,70,000/- during July, 2017 to March, 2018 with credit notes of Rs. 20,000/- raised in the month of February, 2018 which were duly accounted for in GSTR-3B filed for the month of June, 2018. In such a scenario, the amount to be considered for filing 4A shall be Rs. 5,70,000/-. However, amount of Rs. 20,000/- will be reflected as tax reduced through amendments in serial no. 11 of the annual return.
Situation No. 3-Assessee made B2C supplies of Rs. 5,70,000/- during July, 2017 to March, 2018 with credit notes of Rs. 20,000/- raised in the month of April, 2018 which were duly accounted for in GSTR-3B filed for the month of May, 2018. In such a scenario, the amount to be considered for filing 4A shall be Rs. 5,70,000/-. The credit notes of Rs. 20,000/- raised in financial year 2018-19 will be part of annual return filed for the financial year 2018-19 and will not be considered while filing annual return for the financial year 2017-18.
 
We hope we clarified the different presentations to be made in various situations as discussed above in simple manner. The other aspects of presentation of various figures in annual return will be discussed in our next update.
This is solely for the educational purpose.
You can reach us at www.capradeepjain.com, at our facebook page on
https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/ as well as follow us on Twitter at https://www.twitter.com/@capradeepjain21
           
 
 
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