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 06.09.2016

SECTION 49- AUDIT BY TAX AUTHORITIES

 
GST DAILY DOSE OF UPDATION:-
 
 
SECTION 49- AUDIT BY TAX AUTHORITIES:-
 
(1)                  The [Commissioner of CGST/Commissioner of SGST] or any officer authorised by him, by way of a general or a specific order, may undertake audit of the business transactions of any taxable person for such period, at such frequency and in such manner as may be prescribed.
 
(2)                   The tax authorities referred to in sub-section (1) may conduct audit at the place of business of the taxable person and/or in their office.
 
(3)                   The taxable person shall be informed, by way of a notice, sufficiently in advance, not less than fifteen working days, prior to the conduct of audit in the manner prescribed.
 
(4)                   The audit shall be carried out in a transparent manner and completed within a period of three months from the date of commencement of audit.
 
Provided that where the Commissioner is satisfied that audit in respect of such taxable person cannot be completed within three months from the date of commencement of audit, he may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the period by a further period not exceeding six months.
 
Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section, ‘commencement of audit’ shall mean the date on which the records and other documents, called for by the tax authorities, are made available by the taxable person or the actual institution of audit at the place of business, whichever is later.
 
(5)                   During the course of audit, the authorised officer may require the taxable person, to afford him the necessary facility to verify the books of account or other documents as he may require and which may be available at such place, to furnish such information as he may require and render assistance for timely completion of the audit.
 
(6)                   On conclusion of audit, the proper officer shall without delay inform the taxable person, whose records are audited, of the findings, the taxable person’s rights and obligations and the reasons for the findings.
 
(7)                   Where the audit conducted results in detection of tax not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded, or input tax credit erroneously availed, the proper officer may initiate action under section 51.
 
 
It is pertinent to note that presently, under Service Tax Laws, there is a big question mark on whether audit can be conducted by service tax officers as the Delhi High Court has struck down Rule 5A(2) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 in case of TRAVELITE (INDIA) VS UNION OF INDIA [2014 (35) S.T.R. 653 (DEL)]. Moreover, recently, even the new Rule 5A(2) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 has been declared as ultra vires by the same Delhi High Court in the case of MEGA CABS PVT. LTD. VS UNION OF INDIA [2016 (43) S.T.R. 67 (DEL)] on the ground that revenue authorities are not empowered to conduct audit of records of assessee and the audit may be conducted only by Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant. In light of the present context, the incorporation of provision regarding conduct of audit by revenue officers in GST should be re-looked. Furthermore, at present, there is no statutory provision for audit under Central Excise/Service Tax Laws but in the GST regime, it is proposed in section 42(4) that every registered taxable person whose turnover during a financial year exceeds the prescribed limit shall get his accounts audited by a Chartered Accountant or a Cost Accountant. It is pointed that when there is provision of statutory audit under the proposed GST regime and there is also provision of special audit being conducted by revenue department, then what is the need for incorporating provisions for conduct of audit by tax authorities.
 
 
 
On studying the above provisions, it is also worth noting that the audit by tax authorities shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of commencement of audit and this period may be further extended to six months by the Commissioner. Presently, there is no time period prescribed for audit conducted by departmental officers under Excise/Service Tax Laws and the audit is completed in maximum 15 days. However, the proposed GST regime provides that audit may be completed within 3 months and maximum within 6 months time period which is substantially high. With increased compliance by filing of 37 returns by an assessee on different dates in a month, if the revenue officers will conduct audit that may proceed upto 3 months, the assessee would hardly have time to conduct its business operations. Hence, the time limit for conducting audits should be revised on downward side.
 
 
You may also visit our FB page at the following link
 
https://www.facebook.com/GSTTODAYBYPRADEEPJAIN/
 
 

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