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

Note on GSTR 2A- 20% provision and accounting entries

Note on GSTR 2A- 20% provision and accounting entries

The present note seeks to discuss the provisions regarding restriction of credit availment to the extent of 20% which is to be implemented with effect from October, 2019. A new sub-rule (4) has been inserted in Rule 36 dealing with conditions for claiming input tax credit which reads as follows:

“(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 with respect to invoices or debit notes which have been uploaded.

Let us understand this with the help of an example. Suppose Mr. X is a registered person in GST era.

(a)  ITC reflected in GSTR 2A in October 2019 Rs. 1,00,000

(b) Ineligible Credit as per 2A out of (a) above Rs. 20,000

(c)  Therefore, Eligible Credit i.e (a)-(b) is Rs.80,000

(d) ITC as per books of accounts is Rs.1,50,000

(e)  Provisional ITC (20% of the limit) that can be claimed =20%*80000= Rs.16,000

(f)   Total ITC eligible for availment in 3B return =80,000+16,000
=Rs.96,000

(g)  Credit to be transferred in unclaimed account in books of accounts 1,50,000-96,000=Rs.54,000

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, in-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. We can maximize our credit availment by doing various permutation and combination of invoices but it will be nearest to 20%. Suppose in above example, 20% comes to Rs. 16,000/- but the combination of invoices not uploaded by the supplier is Rs. 15,272/- and rest all invoices involve credit greater than Rs. 10,000/- then we should avail Rs. 15,272/- and not Rs. 16,000/- in GSTR-3B. In nutshell, the credit availment to the extent of 20% should also be supported by invoices and should not be on ad-hoc basis.

Furthermore, 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 CGST 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.

The invoices which were transferred to unclaimed ledgers in the previous month and are duly reflecting in updated GSTR 2A of next months and previous months would be transferred to input credit ledgers.

Entries would be-

Input CGST a/c       Dr

Input SGST a/c       Dr

To Unclaimed Input CGST a/c ….
To Unclaimed Input SGST a/c ….

A taxpayer will have to reconcile ITC between books of accounts and Form GSTR-2A in 8 days, i.e. starting from 12th of the succeeding month and before 20th of such month before filing Form GSTR-3B. It is practically impossible to undertake such detailed exercise in such a limited time frame.

Another critical aspect which stands unaddressed relates to the cases wherein a taxpayer has significant procurements from vendors who file quarterly Form GSTR-1. The ITC owing to such vendors shall always be in the unmatched bucket, which will have to be reconciled on quarterly basis. Hence, in first two months of the quarter, the taxpayer will have to forego validly due ITC.

Goods-in-transit is a common practice in business, and it is only logical that some procurement at month-end will be received in next month. Under GST, ITC on such invoices can be availed in month of receipt. Hence, a monthly reconciliation will have mismatches related to goods in transit (both opening and closing), and opening goods-in-transit needs to be matched by the taxpayer by analysing Form GSTR-2A of the previous month.

 

This provision has increased the complications further for the taxpayer and instead of availing this benefit of availing credit pertaining to invoices not uploaded by the supplier to the extent of 20% of the eligible credit appearing in GSTR-2A, the taxpayer can simply follow the policy for availing eligible credit that is being reflected in GSTR-2A. This will save them from the reconciliations to be made every month with respect to 20% calculation.

 

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