Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Service tax penalty can’t survive when assessee acted on dept.’s own view of non-taxability: Delhi High Court. *  GST section 74 extended limitation questionable when form 26AS mismatch was already known: Karnataka High Court grants interim relief. *  CGST demand prima facie impermissible after state GST settlement under section 128A: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court asks GSTAT to sympathetically consider delay as taxpayers pursued remedy before wrong forum. *  Supreme Court stays Tripura High Court ruling protecting genuine buyers from ITC denial over supplier’s GST default. *  Diary entries alone can’t prove clandestine removal of goods: CESTAT quashes excise penalty on steel trader. *  Customs could investigate preferential tariff claims even before sec. 28DA: Delhi High Court. *  Customs dept. relied on fake AI generated case laws: supreme court quashes Rs. 425.28 crore penalty. *  No GST exemption in affiliation and annual registration charges for admission or conduct Of examinations: GSTAT. *  Mere invoices, cheque payments insufficient to establish genuine movement of goods: GSTAT restores Rs. 43.44 lakh ITC demand. *  Consolidated GST show cause notice covering multiple financial years is not without jurisdiction: Delhi High Court. *  Construction of independent houses on separate plots not taxable as ‘Residential Complex’ without common facilities: CESTAT. *  GST penalty exceeding statutory maximum unsustainable; Allahabad High Court quashes ? 50,000/- penalty after taxpayer filed return and paid late fee. *  GST order against standard chartered bank passed without hearing set aside by Bombay High Court. *  Retracted statements can’t be relied upon without cross-examination: CESTAT quashes gold confiscation. *  Burden to prove misclassification lies on customs department: CESTAT. *  CESTAT quashes Rs. 98 lakh excise demand on clearance of used refractory brick scrap. *  Service tax demand on irrigation works quashed: Karnataka High Court rules sale of goods component not taxable as service. *  GSTAT restores tax and penalty for transporting iron scrap without E-way bill citing intent to evade tax. *  Madras High Court stays GST recovery from directors without opportunity to show cause under section 89. *  Madras high court stays GST recovery notice against directors; finds prima facie case on applicability of section 79(1)(c). *  Procedural lapses can’t justify harsh punishment without serious customs breach: CESTAT quashes customs broker licence revocation. *  Service tax payable on land leasing and sports complex charges: CESTAT. *  Settled customs dispute can’t be reopened through Article 226 challenge to interest liability: Delhi High Court. *  Mere facilitation of customs clearance can’t establish knowledge of smuggling: Madras High Court. *  GST registration cancellation stayed: Allahabad High Court questions 99% ITC utilisation cap under rule 86B. *  Composition scheme lapses automatically on crossing Rs. 1.5 crore turnover: GSTAT. *  Gujarat High Court quashes GST cancellation orders after officer relied on non-existent AI-generated case laws. *  Importers liable for customs duty benefits availed through manipulated scrips: Delhi High Court. *  Procedural E-way bill lapse alone can’t justify penalty where genuine transaction and absence of tax evasion are established: GSTAT.
Subject News *  Documentary evidence dominates probe, further custody unwarranted: mumbai court grants bail in Rs. 22.44 crore customs duty evasion case. *  Business premises can’t remain sealed for non-participation in GST search: Allahabad High Court. *  GST pre-deposit must be refunded proportionately when taxpayer partly succeeds in appeal: Bombay High Court. *  Supreme Court grants 30 days to file GST appeal; keeps pre-deposit issue open due to deposit in parallel CGST proceedings. *  GST demand can’t exceed amount proposed in SCN: Allahabad High Court quashes Rs. 20.47 Crore order. *  Hundreds-of-crores GST demand and heavy 10% pre-deposit no ground to bypass statutory appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Delhi High Court refuses to entertain challenge to gold confiscation due to statutory appeal remedy and unexplained delay. *  Procedural error in customs broker licence inquiry can be rectified through remand: Delhi High Court. *  GSTR-2A mismatch alone can’t justify ITC denial without invoice-wise verification; personal hearing mandatory: GSTAT. *  GST order passed without uploading personal hearing notices violates sec. 75(4): Allahabad High Court. *  TAX EVASION - Sec. 74 GST SCN quashed for not spelling out fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression: Allahabad High Court. *  STPI’s SOFTEX certification and NoC charges taxable as business support services: CESTAT. *  Suspicion can’t replace proof: CESTAT quashes penalty in alleged gold-smuggling operation. *   Limitation runs from communication of order: Madras High Court upholds rejection of delayed GST Appeals. *  Rajasthan High Court quashes GST demand over unsigned show cause notice. *  ITC recovery upheld where supplier failed to deposit GST: Rajasthan High Court. *  Customs commissioner’s empowered to make port trust liable for duty on pilfered goods: Supreme Court. *  Rectification proceedings can’t be used to challenge an uncontested GST assessment through a writ petition: Andhra Pradesh HC. *  GST proceedings against deceased proprietor unsustainable without notice to legal heir: GSTAT. *  Mere availment of ineligible self-assessed ITC doesn’t amount to suppression without evidence of fraud or wilful misstatement: GSTAT. *  Disposal of mining overburden by entity authorised by mining lease holder constitutes taxable service: CESTAT. *  Toll plaza data not mandatory for ITC refund: GSTAT. *  Disputed GST fraud allegations require investigation: Punjab and Haryana High Court makes interim bail absolute in alleged fraud and GST fraud case. *  Non-manufacturer contractor liable to deposit excess excise duty collected from buyer: CESTAT. *  GST order can’t reject taxpayer’s reply as “not satisfactory” without reasons: Madhya Pradesh High Court. *  Uncorroborated statements can’t establish alleged diversion of duty-free goods: CESTAT. *  Erection services were not liable to service tax prior to 10th september 2004: CESTAT. *  Sec. 74 GST notice must spell out statutory ingredients for invoking extended tax demand proceedings: Allahabad High Court. *  No jurisdictional bar under section 6(2)(b) in parallel CGST SGST proceedings: Delhi High Court refuses to bypass GST appeal remedy. *  Madras High Court remits GST demand for fresh adjudication after taxpayer claims it was unaware of SCN following business closure.  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE-REAL ESTATE-PART-12 ADJUSTMENT OF GST PAID ON ADVANCES PRIOR TO 1.4.2019.

GST UPDATE-REAL ESTATE-PART-12 ADJUSTMENT OF GST PAID ON ADVANCES PRIOR TO 1.4.2019.

CA. Pradeep Jain

Your Need Our Concern

GST UPDATE-REAL ESTATE-PART-12 ADJUSTMENT OF GST PAID ON ADVANCES PRIOR TO 1.4.2019.

 

The new tax system introduced in real estate sector has been a pandora box which will remain unsolved till many coming years.In this series of updates regarding clarifications for complexities in new system, this update seeks to highlight the question- Whether GST paid on advances which remain unadjusted as on 1st April 2019 can be adjusted against the output tax liability supposedly to be paid in cash in new tax system?

Before proceeding further, we are discussing the treatment of the advances paid, advances adjusted, credit notes issued in a particular month in GSTR 3B and GSTR 1 returns.

 Although it is being clearly instructed while filing of GSTR 3B return that the advances against which tax has been paid shall be adjusted as and when the invoice has been raised against the same.Details of advances as well as adjustment of advances against invoices are required to be shown as a part of 3.1(a) in GSTR 3B. In addition to this, Details of the amount received as the advance are required to be mentioned in sr. no. 11A of the GSTR – 1 return. As it shows the figure of the advance money received in the tax period for which invoice has not been issued, details of all the invoices raised in the month for which return is being filed but advance was received and tax was already paid in the previous months has to be entered in sr. no. 11B of GSTR 1.

 

One of the practical issues among while filing GSTR 3B is how to fill GSTR 3B Form if the Sales return (Credit Notes issued) for any month is more than the actual Outward Supply for that month?While the GST Department and CBEC has not yet come out with clarification to these problems since the GSTR 3-B Form does not accept figures in the negative. But the experts have advised that in case of excess credit notes, the unadjusted minus figures should be adjusted against the sale of subsequent months of 3B. For example,Mr. A developer has issued credit notes worth Rs. 20,00,000/-(CGST 1,80,000  and SGST 1,80,000  each ) in March 2019 whereas the sale figure was Rs. 1,00,000/- (CGST 9000  and SGST 9000 each ) in the month of March 2019. Therefore, tax amounting to 1,71,000 each in CGST and SGST remain unadjusted in the same month. Since from 1st April onwards, taxpayers shifting to new tax regime has to dispose of the tax liability fully in cash, but the unadjusted advance would tantamount to payment of tax liability using input tax credit. The advances and credit notes unadjusted at the end of March 2019 were paid off using Input tax credit lying in the electronic credit ledger of the taxpayers. The department may raise contention that it is a tax evasion activity and therefore the whole amount would be required to be paid off in cash.

The point to be kept in mind that there is no utility of refunding the tax amount pertaining to the said unadjusted advance and credit notes in cash on the online portal. 
Therefore, the only option left with the assessee is to adjust such amounts in subsequent months against the 1% and 5% sales figure. 
Moreover, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has recently issued clarification in the form of FAQs on GST changes for real estate sector said that builders will have to refund GST paid by homebuyers if he/she cancels the flat booked in the last fiscal and will be allowed to avail credit adjustment for such refunds.
Developer will be able to issue a ‘Credit Note’ to buyer as per provisions of Section 34 in case of change in price.

 

Also, builders, not buyers, will have the power to choose between the optional GST rates decided for the real estate sector by May 10.
If a real estate developer has collected 12 per cent GST from homebuyers beginning April 1, 2019, but later opted for 5 per cent rate, the builder will have to refund the extra tax (7 per cent) collected to the buyer. The FAQs, however, did not clearly spell out whether 7 per cent tax refunded by the builder will be adjusted against his GST liability. The FAQs said developer will be able to issue a ‘Credit Note’ to the buyer as per provisions of Section 34 in case of change in price or cancellation of booking. “Developer shall be able to take adjustment of tax paid in respect of the amount of such Credit Note,” the FAQ said. If the developer is allowed to adjust the excess tax paid by way of utilisation of input tax credit prior to 01.04.2019 for discharging GST liability of 1%/5% after 01.04.2019, it will lead to utilisation of input tax credit indirectly even after 01.04.2019 which is technically not permissible. This can definitely be a measure of tax planning by builders and the quantum of litigation on this subject will be revealed in the days to come.

This is solely for the 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