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 Restrictions on availment of ITC

GST Update on Restrictions on availment of ITC
Restrictions on availment of ITC
 
We have already informed you about the restriction of 20% on taking of credit. We are discussing in depth about this provision. Following new sub-rule (4) has been inserted in Rule 36 dealing with conditions for claiming input tax credit:
 
“(4) Input tax credit to be availed by a registered person in respect of invoices or debit notes, the details of which have not been uploaded by the suppliers under sub-section (1) of section 37, shall not exceed 20 percent of the eligible credit available in respect of invoices or debit notes the details of which have been uploaded by the suppliers under sub-section (1) of section 37.”
 
Hence the above inserted sub-rule provides that the availment of ITC with respect to the invoices or debit notes not uploaded by the supplier cannot exceed 20% of the eligible credit in respect of invoices or debit notes which have been uploaded.
 
Let us understand this with the help of an example. Suppose Mr. A registered person is a registered person in GST era.
(a) ITC reflected in GSTR 2A in October 2019 Rs. 1,00,000
(a)1 Ineligible Credit as per 2A out of (a) above Rs. 20,000
(a)2 Therefore, Eligible Credit i.e. (a)-(a)1 Rs.80,000
(b) ITC as per books of accounts Rs.1,50,000
     
  Provisional ITC (20% of the limit) that can be claimed =20%*80000= Rs.16,000
(c) Total ITC eligible for availment in 3B return =80,000+16,000
=Rs.96,000
(d) Credit to be transferred in unclaimed account in books of accounts =80%*80,000=Rs.64,000
 
ITC will be restricted for buyers if suppliers have not uploaded invoice and paid tax. Buyers will be able to claim only 20% provisional ITC. Provisional ITC will be a maximum of 20% of the ITC available as per GSTR-2A i.e. 20% of ITC for invoices that have been uploaded by suppliers.
 
The inserted rule does not elaborate the term eligible credit. However, depth analysis of the term depicts that eligible credit is the total credit reflected in the GSTR 2A for a particular period or month. However, this credit excludes ineligible credit as per Section 17(5), credit pertaining to exempt supplies, reverse charge supplies reflecting in 2A return etc.
 
However, the credit to be taken cannot be exactly 20%, it has to be based on the invoices only. You can maximize your credit by doing various permutation and combination of invoices but it will be nearest to 20%. Supposing in above example, 20% comes to 1,19,200/- then you should avail so and rest of the invoices cannot be availed.
 
Moreover, credits which cannot be availed due to 20% restriction are supposedly to be debited in unclaimed ledgers in our books of accounts rather than directly posting in Input ledgers.
The entry would be as follows-
Purchases a/c Dr……
Unclaimed Input CGST a/c Dr….
Unclaimed Input SGST a/c Dr….
          To Sundry Creditors a/c………
Or else at the end of the month, you can pass the entry and transfer from Input SGST and Input CSGT to unclaimed credit account. Now, it is not clear that 20 percent will be applicable for each account of CGST, SGST and IGST separately or overall restriction will be applicable. If overall restriction is applied then everyone will take 20 percent IGST credit which can be utilized in payment of any account.
 
Every month while reconciling GSTR 2A with the books of accounts, the excess credit remaining after availing 20% credit will be transferred to Unclaimed input ledgers.
 
There are certainly many more practical difficulties which will be faced by the assessee while complying with the inserted rule. Now continue with the same example, suppose, the next month figures are as under:-
 
(a) ITC reflected in GSTR 2A in November 2019 Rs. 2,00,000
(a)1 Ineligible Credit as per 2A out of (a) above Rs. 50,000
(a)2 Therefore, Eligible Credit i.e. (a)-(a)1 Rs.1,50,000
(b) ITC as per books of accounts Rs.2,50,000
     
 
 
The issue under consideration is basically with the calculation of eligible credit for each period and maintenance of accounts.
 
The major questions arises –
While matching GSTR 2A of the next month, some of the invoices of previous month is uploaded. invoices pertaining to Rs. 50,000 of the previous month are uploaded by the supplier. This includes some credit which has been considered in 20% limit and credit has been availed instantly in October 2019. Out of Rs. 50,000 uploaded of previous month, 30000 credit is pertaining unclaimed credit and 20,000 to claimed invoices of previous month. Now the problem comes up with the calculation of eligible ITC for the November 2019 month.
 
There are different schools of thoughts for calculating eligible credits.
(1) Technically, Eligible credit for the month of Nov 19= invoices which were unclaimed last month uploaded in GSTR2A in this month (30,000 in example)+ eligible credit reflected in 2A of Nov19
(2) However some experts are of view that the calculation should include absolute figure of Rs. 50,000 for the purpose of eligible credit. But the credit of 20,000 is already taken. However, this school says that 20,000 was never considered for 20 % limit although these are now uploaded in GSTR-2A.
 
If accumulated credit is taken for calculating eligible credits, then assessee has to devote his day and night in matching GSTR 2A of all the previous months which is a very tedious task and never ending exercise. The assesse was not able to do it on annual basis but whether they can do it on monthly basis and that too in a limited time.
 
All GSTR-1 will be uploaded on 11th, hence GSTR-2A will probably come on 15th for all assessees. Then they have to reconcile the same for all earlier months within 5 days and then file the returns.
 
In addition to this, how the assessee will do accounting entries relating to input tax credit which are ineligible due to 20% limit but eligible as per GST law that too month wise in their books of accounts. Maintenance of accounts as per this rule will be an impossible task for the accountants.
Another implication of this amendment is for small providers who file quarterly returns. Their credit will be available to purchaser on quarterly basis. But that will not be acceptable to large units. They will not trade with small assesees. Hence, they will be compelled to opt for monthly returns.
 
It does not seem to be practically possible to implement this situation. The views and suggestions from all netizens are invited on this burning issue.
 
The content of this GST update is for educational purpose only and not intended for solicitation.
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