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 RESTRICTION ON GENERATION OF E-WAY BILL

GST UPDATE ON RESTRICTION ON GENERATION OF E-WAY BILL

GST UPDATE ON RESTRICTION ON GENERATION OF E-WAY BILL
After the recommendations made by the government in its 31st council meeting, the requisite notifications have been issued for the purpose of implementing these proposals. One such proposal made was that taxpayers who have not filed the returns for two consecutive tax periods shall be restricted from generating e-way bills. Thus, in this regard, the government has issued notification no. 74/2018- Central tax dated 31.12.2018 inserting a new Rule 138E after rule 138D of the CGST Rules. The provision contained in Rule 138E reads as follows:- 
Restriction on furnishing of information in PART A of FORM GST EWB-01.- Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1) of rule 138, no person (including a consignor, consignee, transporter, an e-commerce operator or a courier agency) shall be allowed to furnish the information in PART A of FORM GST EWB-01 in respect of a registered person, whether as a supplier or a recipient, who,—
(a) being a person paying tax under section 10, has not furnished the returns for two consecutive tax periods; 
or 
(b) being a person other than a person specified in clause (a), has not furnished the returns for a consecutive period of two months
Provided that the Commissioner may, on sufficient cause being shown and for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order, allow furnishing of the said information in PART A of FORM GST EWB 01, subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be specified by him:
Provided further that no order rejecting the request of such person to furnish the information in PART A of FORM GST EWB 01 under the first proviso shall be passed without affording the said person a reasonable opportunity of being heard: Provided also that the permission granted or rejected by the Commissioner of State tax or Commissioner of Union territory tax shall be deemed to be granted or, as the case may be, rejected by the Commissioner. Explanation:– For the purposes of this rule, the expression ―Commissioner‖ shall mean the jurisdictional Commissioner in respect of the persons specified in clauses (a) and (b).‖.

From the above amendment it seems as if the government is determined to establish a well knitted framework to keep overall check on the assessee so as to ensure proper compliance with the GST Laws. The government is bringing such provisions which mandatorily require assessee to file returns and pay taxes else their business would be hampered. It is very well known that the provisions of e-way bill for movement of goods has been strictly adopted and it is provided that if the assessee fails to file return for two consecutive tax periods, the facility to generate e-way bill would be de-activated thereby effecting the working of the business of the assessee. This provision will be a setback for all assessees except service providers who do not generate e-way bills.

Another point that is worth observing is that the restriction to generate e-way bill will be applicable for supplier and recipient both so as to ensure that there is no loophole in the control mechanism developed by the government. Although, the liability to generate e-way bill is generally of supplier of goods but the recipient of goods is liable to generate e-way bill if the goods are purchased from un-registered supplier. However, in case where supplier and recipeint both are registered, there may be possibility that receiver can generate e-way bill. In order to prohibit recipeint to generate e-way bill in cases where the supplier defaults in furnishing return for two consecutive tax periods, it is being mentioned that e-way bill cannot be generated either in the capacity of supplier or recipeint thereby ensuring total check on the assessee.

However, the government has discriminated among the assessees as this restriction of generation of e-way bill will be attracted for composition assessees is they have not filed returns for consecutive two tax periods meaning two quarters. This is for the reason that the composition assessees are required to pay tax and file returns on quarterly basis. As against this, the normal assessees (having turnover below 1.5 Crores or above) will come within purview of this restriction if they fail to furnish returns for two consecutive months as they are required to file GSTR-3B on monthly basis. Accordingly, lenient approach has been adopted for assessees opting under composition scheme as the provisions of restriction of generation of e-way bill will attract at comparatively later point of time than normal assessees.

Lastly, the discretion given to the Commissioner to allow generation of e-way bill in exceptional circumstances for reasons to be recorded in writing on certain conditions is unreasonable as practically it is impossible to satisfy genuineness of case. The provision should illustrate the situations where the discretion could be exercised by the Commissioner. Moreover, the provisions as regards activation of the facility to generate e-way bills upon filing the returns for the required period is not incorporated which puts question mark on the removal of restriction after the assessee has complied with the GST law and has filed the desired returns. The government should also clearly state the period within which the assessee would be able to generate e-way bills after furnishing the required returns.

The content of this GST update is for educational purpose only and not intended for solicitation.

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