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 ON IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF NOTIFICATION EXTENDING DUE DATE OF FILING RETURN FOR MAY, 2020 68/2020-21

GST UPDATE ON IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF NOTIFICATION EXTENDING DUE DATE OF FILING RETURN FOR MAY, 2020 68/2020-21
The government is trying its best to provide relaxations to the trade and industry and has lowered the rate of interest on delayed payment of taxes and has extended the due date of filing return for the month of May, 2020 vide Notification No. 36/2020-Central Tax dated 03.04.2020 by way of insertion of provisos.  The present update seeks to discuss the manner of amending the notification no. 29/2020-Central Tax dated 23.03.2020 and the issue of interest liability for the month of May, 2020.
 
The Notification No. 36/2020-Central Tax dated 03.04.2020 has inserted three provisos to provide the due date of filing return GSTR-3B by the assessees for the month of May, 2020. The third proviso, being inserted states that the GSTR-3B shall be furnished electronically on or before 27th June, 2020 for assessees having aggregate turnover of more than Rs. 5 Crores in the previous financial year. Thereafter, the fourth and fifth proviso prescribes the due date for assessees having aggregate turnover of upto Rs. 5 Crores in the previous financial year on the basis of States as 12th July, 2020 and 14th July, 2020. Now, coming to the notification no. 29/2020-Central Tax dated 23.03.2020 prescribing due dates of GSTR-3B for the month of April, 2020 to September, 2020. The said notification stated that GSTR-3B should be filed on or before the 20th day of the month suceeding such month. The first proviso and second proviso provides due date of filing GSTR-3B for assessees having aggregate turnover upto Rs. 5 Crores in the previous financial year as 22nd day/24th day of the month suceeding such month. It is also worth mentioning that the paragraph no. 2 of this notification states that every registered person furnishing GSTR-3B shall make payment of taxes, not later than the last date as specified in the first paragraph on which he is required to furnish the said return.
 
Now, the question arises is whether the last date of payment of taxes as mentioned in the paragraph no. 2 of the Notification No. 29/2020-Central Tax dated 23.03.2020 also stands modified in light of the amendment made in the due date of filing return for the month of May, 2020 vide Notification No. 36/2020-Central Tax dated 03.04.2020? Well, in order to address this question, it is pertinent to refer to the meaning of paragraph vis a vis proviso in the notification.
 
As per the dictionary meaning of paragraph, it is a distinct section of a piece of writing, usually dealing with a single theme and indicated by a new line, indentation, or numbering. Now, the question arises is that whether provisos inserted can be considered to be part of the first paragraph of the notification no. 29/2020-Central Tax dated 23.03.2020? If we speak of legal language, the sub-sections of a section may contain provisos and while interpreting the particular sub-section, the proviso is also considered as part of the said sub-section. The proviso is indented or started with a new line but the exception it carves is to be applied to the said sub-section. Consequently, going by the numbering distinction, as the paragraph no. 2 is separately demarcated, the provisos of first paragraph would form part of first paragraph and so the last date of payment of taxes for the month of May, 2020 would be the due dates revised vide Notification No. 36/2020-Central Tax dated 03.04.2020.
Therefore, in our opinion, no interest would be payable by the assessee if the taxes are paid by them after 20th June, 2020. This interpretation also holds good as when the original notification no. 29/2020-Central Tax dated 23.03.2020 was issued, then also, the assessees having turnover upto Rs. 5 Crores were not liable to pay interest for the period from 20th day of the suceeding month to the 22nd or 24th day of the suceeding month.
The intention of the government to extend the due date of return and payment of taxes for the month of May, 2020 is clear and obvious but the way the amendments are being carried out complicate the interpretation.

This is solely for 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