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 ON FILING OF ITC-04

GST UPDATE ON FILING OF ITC-04

GST UPDATE ON FILING OF ITC-04
We submit that the due date for filing of ITC-04 is Oct 25, 2017. We further submit that GST ITC-04 is the quarterly return for submitting the details of goods sent to job worker and received back therefrom or sent to another job worker. This has been prescribed in section 143 of CGST Act, 2017 read with rule 45 of CGST Rules, 2017. However, the offline utility for ITC-04 was made available on the common portal in the evening on 23.10.2017 whereas the online facility was made available on the common portal only on 25.10.2017, being the due date of filing ITC-04. In our opinion, the due date of filing ITC-04 shall be extended so that the assessees are saved from the glitches of haphazard filing of return at the last moment. Not only this, appropriate notification should be issued for waiving initiation of any penal action against the assessees for delay in filing ITC-04 for the quarter July, 2017 to September, 2017.

Apart from the request of extension of the time limit for filing ITC-04 for the quarter July, 2017 to September, 2017, we also wish to highlight certain anomalies in the details required to be submitted in ITC-04 by the job-workers as follows:-
1. The offline utility does not allows to give reference of job work challans issued prior to 01.07.2017 as the requirement to file ITC-04 is only for goods sent to job-work during the period from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2017. However, there is possibility that the goods sent for job work prior to 01.07.2017 are received back in July, 2017 to September, 2017 or are being sent to another job worker in July, 2017 to September, 2017. In such a situation, the assessee is unable to reflect the details of receipt of job-worked goods or the details of goods sent to another job-worker in the ITC-04 filed by them. A suitable clarification in this regard should be issued as to whether the details of goods sent prior to 01.07.2017 and received subsequently in the GST regime are to be reported in ITC-04 or not.
2. The offline utility also has discrepancy in mentioning the original challan date. The excel sheet depicting details of goods sent for job-work by manufacturer to the job worker mentions the month of July in the challan dates whereas the sheet pertaining to the details of goods received from job worker or sent out from business place of job work mentions the month of August in the original challan date column. The excel sheet pertaining to goods sent from job worker to manufacturer mentions ‘original challan date’ but the information thereon mentions the month of August which is totally wrong. A suitable clarification as regards the meaning of ‘original challan date’ in the excel sheet pertaining to goods sent from job worker to manufacturer should be issued in order to resolve the confusion.
3. There is also no mechanism of reporting in cases where 5 different inputs are sent to job worker which are being used in the manufacture of job-worked goods. To illustrate, if 5 inputs being A, B, C, D and E are being sent to job-worker for manufacturing a product being X, then there is no mechanism for reporting the details of inputs contained in the job-worked goods. It is possible that different proportion of inputs is being used for manufacturing product X and it is also possible that the job-worked goods are received back in lots. Say for example, if 50 Kgs of each inputs is being sent to job-worker to manufacture 75 Kgs of finished product being X, and if the finished products are being received in the lots of 25 Kgs by the principal manufacturer. In such a situation, the mechanism of reporting the goods sent to job-worker and that received back is not at all clear and it is not understandable as to how to report such transactions in ITC-04.
4. There is also no mechanism of reporting cases where a particular quantity of inputs is being sent to job-worker for job work and the job-worked goods are being received back in installments by the principal manufacturer. Say for example, if 100 Kgs of inputs are sent to job worker and the job-worked goods are received in the lots of 20 Kgs. In such a situation, whether reference of original challan is to be given multiple times in the excel sheet pertaining to details of goods received back from the job-worker? A suitable clarification should be issued in this regard for reporting of goods received from job-worker in installments.
5. There is also no clarity as regards the value to be shown in the details of goods received back from job-worker. There is no method to ascertain the value of job work goods since these are not being sold. It might be possible that these job work goods are further used in manufacture of final product. Hence, a suitable clarification should also be issued in this regard.

We have pointed out the practical problems being faced by the assessees in reflecting the details of goods sent to job-worker and received back from the job-worker. We hope that suitable clarifications regarding technical problems being faced in reporting of ITC-04 are issued at the earliest possible.

You can visit us at www.capradeepjain.com , our facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/… and our twitter account at @capradeep21

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