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 Jharkhand High Court decision for no interest for tax paid under wrong head 135/2020-21

GST update on Jharkhand High Court decision for no interest for tax paid under wrong head 135/2020-21
There were lot of mistakes committed by the taxpayers during the initial years of GST implementation and one of common mistake was payment of tax under wrong head. Although, there is specific provision in section 77 of CGST Act, 2017 and section 19 of the IGST Act, 2017 that no interest shall be payable for payment of tax under wrong head by the assessee but the revenue department in the case of SHREE NANAK FERRO ALLOYS (P.) LTD. [2020 (114) taxmann.com 302 (Jharkhand) had demanded interest for payment of tax under wrong head. Therefore, the assessee filed writ petition before the Hon’ble Jharkhand high court with respect to non-levy of interest on wrong payment of tax and allowing adjustment of excess tax paid by then. The analysis of the decision is the subject matter of discussion of the present update.
In this case, the petitioner, while filing GSTR-1 for the month September 2017, declared IGST liability amounting to Rs 7451127 under the IGST and Rs 268470 under the head CGST and SGST each. But while filing GSTR-3B for the same month, it mistakenly declared tax liability of Rs. 3252484.58 under the head IGST and Rs 4198643.71 under the CGST and GST head. This mistake of payment of tax under wrong head remained unnoticed for 1 year and subsequently, the petitioner Company was informed of the mistake during the course of audit by CERA and the petitioner was asked to pay the short paid IGST to the tune of Rs.41,98,842/- along with the interest.
The petitioner contends that tax was paid within time but paid under the wrong head due to some confusion in early year of GST implementation. This petitioner prayed that, it is bona fide mistake on his part and should be condoned by department.
The revenue contended that GSTR-1 was filed correctly by the taxpayer and so payment of taxes under wrong head in GSTR-3B does not indicate bonafides of the petitioner. Further, there is no provision for transfer / adjustment / utilization of paid tax from one head to the other head and accordingly, the provisions of section 77 of the CGST Act, or section 19 of the IGST Act, shall not be applicable in the present case. It was contended that the provisions of section 77 of CGST Act, 2017/ section 19 of the IGST Act, 2017 will not apply in the present case as the petitioner deliberately paid wrong taxes in GSTR-3B filed by them whereas reflected correct details in GSTR-1.
The Hon’ble High Court observed that the petitioner Company had discharged their tax liability under the IGST head, but inadvertently the petitioner deposited the amount under the CGST head. It is not the case that the petitioner Company has concealed the transaction or has committed any fraud in discharging its tax liability. Further, the petitioner cannot be doubted as due to initial stage of GST regime, there is possibility of confusion as regards the correct head for deposition of tax. Consequently, the Hon’ble High Court directed the petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs. 41,98,642/-, under the IGST head and claim refund of the said amount paid in CGST head or adjust the excess amount against their future liabilities. The petitioner shall not be liable to pay any interest on the said amount.
The above decision indicates the pro-revenue approach of the officers inspite of clear cut provisions regarding no levy of interest on payment of tax under wrong head. The above decision loses relevance in the present time as now the GST portal offers inter head transfer of amount in the electronic cash ledger in case of mistake in deposition of tax under wrong head vide PMT-09 so there is no need to file refund claim by the assessees which is herculean task.
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 and u may also follow us on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/ca-pradeep-jain-b6a31a16
 
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