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 ON ANNUAL RETURN COMPLIANCE-PART-5

GST UPDATE ON ANNUAL RETURN COMPLIANCE-PART-5
GST UPDATE ON ANNUAL RETURN COMPLIANCE-PART-5
 
In earlier update, we discussed about the practical difficulties encountered with respect to transactions and input tax credit pertaining to reverse charge mechanism. In the present update, we wish to discuss the clarifications issued by the recent Press Release dated 4.6.2019 which seeks to resolve various doubts prevailing in the minds of assessee.  
 
We had mentioned in our earlier updates while discussing the change in method of cross-utilisation of input tax credit that the change in law would not have any effect unless and until the common portal of GST supports the change as the online portal has precedence over law in the GST regime. Similarly, although the government has allowed assessees to avail the input tax credit for the financial year 2017-18upto the due date of filing return for the month of March, 2019 vide Removal of Difficulty Order No. 02/2018-Central Tax dated 31.12.2018, but the online utility mentions the period of credit availment as “April to September, 2018” in serial no. 8(C). Consequently, there was doubt in the minds of assessee that whether the input tax credit availed in the returns filed during the period October, 2018 to March, 2018 is to be reported in the said serial no. 8(C) or not? The Press Release has clarified in point no. (b) that input tax credit on inward supplies shall be declared from April, 2018 to March, 2019 in table 8C of Form GSTR-9. This clarification indicates that the Removal of Difficulty Order is to be followed irrespective of the format of GSTR-9 available online on the common portal which is a huge sigh of relief to the assessees.
 
The point no. (d) of the Press Release confirms our view given in our GST Update on Annual Return Compliance Part-1 that although the Instructions to the format of Annual Return makes reference of contents to be taken from GSTR-1 but in reality, the tax paying return being GSTR-3B is required to be given precedence. Therefore, the year in which tax has been paid in GSTR-3B will be taken as the basis of presentation of figures in the annual return.
 
Another important clarification has been given in point no. (g) according to which if IGST has been paid at the time of import of goods but has been availed in the return of April, 2018 to March, 2019 is required to be reflected in table 6(E) of GSTR-9 itself without the need of bifurcating the same as credit of previous financial year availed in subsequent financial year.
 
Lastly, we wish to bring out the contradiction in the clarification given in point no. (e) and point no. (h) of the Press Release. According to point no. (e), any outward supply that was not declared by the assessee in Form GSTR-1 or GSTR-3B shall be declared in Part II of Form GSTR-9 and thereafter, such additional liability will be reflected by the difference between the “tax payable” and “paid through cash” in serial no. 9 of Part IV of the annual return. The additional tax payable shall be paid through DRC-03. This is one method of presentation of additional liability not reported in GSTR-1 or GSTR-3B till date discussed in the Press Release. However, in point no. (h), it is simply stated that payments made through Form DRC-03 for any supplies relating to the period between July, 2017 to March, 2018 will not be accounted for in Form GSTR-9 but shall be reported during reconciliation in Form GSTR-9C. The Press Release does not indicate that the assessee has option to follow either point no. (e) or point no. (h). One may interpret that point no. (e) is to be followed for assessees filing annual return and having turnover upto Rs. 2 Crores who are not liable to submit reconciliation statement while point no. (h) is to be followed for assessees filing annual return along with reconciliation statement. However, the Press Release is clarifications for filing of Annual Return. However, both the points are merely different presentations for additional liability not declared in returns filed by the assessee but clarity in this aspect is needed from the government as following point no. (h) may attract the allegation of improper presentation of data in annual return. 
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