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

Publish Date: 20 Nov, 2010
Print   |    |  Comment

Draft Scheme of On Site Audit in context of Post Clearance Audit for Imports

 

Draft Scheme of “On Site Audit” in context of Post Clearance Audit (PCA) for Imports

 

Prepared By:

CA Pradeep Jain,

CA Preeti Parihar and

Sukhvinder Kaur, LLB [FYIC]

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

“A good beginning makes a good end”.  Hope this comes true for the draft scheme of “On site audit”. Export-Import is an important determinant of growth of a country. A strict policy regarding the import-export may become an obstacle in the growth of the country while a liberal policy may prove destructive to the morals and safety of the country. So, while crossing the custom frontiers of the country, the goods are presided by a number of Rules and Regulations. “On site Audit” is a step towards liberalization of the import procedures, wherein it is proposed to allow the clearance of goods on the basis of declaration given by the importer as followed by the onsite audit. In this article, we are discussing the draft of on-site audit and pros and cons of the same.

 

PURPOSE:

 

At the time of entry of imported goods at customs barriers the Customs Authorities more often examine the goods physically and all the documents relating to import are also verified. The main reason for this is to ensure that the imported goods should not be undervalued, the poor quality of goods are not imported and the goods actually imported are the goods declared by the importer. However, this process of verification of documents and goods increase the time of clearance thereby increasing the storage, warehousing and other related costs. For lessening the cost and for saving time the Government has proposed to allow the imported goods to be cleared on the basis of documents and for conducting of “On site Audit” in the context of post clearance audit (PCA).

 

FOUNDATION OF “ON SITE AUDIT” IN THE CONTEXT OF POST CLEARANCE AUDIT (PCA):

 

As per the Draft, the said scheme is being introduced based on the international trade agreement GATT. In Article VIII of GATT, the provision has been given for post clearance audit. It has been provided that if the goods are cleared at the time of the import on the basis of self assessment without examination of goods and the importer later on subject themselves to post clearance audit, this will result in saving cost as well as time. The underlying idea is to benefit both the importer as well as the Revenue.

 

Another International trade agreement, the Kyoto Convention of World Customs Organization (WCO) is the genesis of the Post clearance audit. It is prescribed that the customs control should be kept to the minimum necessary to meet the objective of maximum facilitation of international trade and travel.

 

THE KYOTO CONVENTION OF WCO:

 

"International Convention on the simplification and harmonization of Customs procedures” commonly known as the ‘Kyoto Convention’; is an international instrument on the harmonization of Customs techniques covering all aspects of Customs legislation. It was done at Kyoto, Japan, on 18 May 1973 and entered into force in 1974. The Kyoto Convention, as has been revised in year 1999, gives the techniques and measures of custom clearances that commensurate with current demands of international trade.

 

PAST MEASURES INTRODUCED:

 

Based on the Kyoto convention, the Board has already introduced the Risk Management System (RMS) in November 2005 for Accredited Clients and Post Clearance Audit (PCA). It has also been extended it to certain other category of importers. The RMS was introduced in order to facilitate the speedy clearance of imported goods. Audit Based Control was introduced in the form of Post Clearance Audit (PCA) to ensure compliance.    

 

However, the PCA introduced by the Board was different from the PCA envisaged in the Kyoto Convention. Thus, the international norms are not being followed word to word.

 

Accredited Clients Programme (ACP) was introduced to assist the importers provided they comply with the laws framed by the Customs Department. Further, the ACP clients are required to workout a reliable system of record keeping and internal controls. Their accounting system was also supposed to meet the recognized standards of accounting. In assurance of all these compliances, the importers were required to produce a certificate from a chartered accountant to this effect in a prescribed form. However, as of now, there is no such requirement for granting the ACP status and the documents are also not audited on site later on.

 

The major aspects of the proposal of on-site audit as discussed in the Draft scheme are as under:

 

-           Jurisdiction of Audit: The manufacturers and service providers registered under the Excise/Service Tax who are already subjected to audit by the Central Excise or service tax Department; the on-site audit will be merged with that audit. Thus, only the importers engaged in trading activity and those units which are exempt/not registered will be left. It is proposed that the address of IEC code would decide the jurisdiction of the concerned audit party. In case the importer-manufacturer/service provider is having more than one premise in different Commissionerates, it is proposed that on-site audit will be conducted both at the factory premises as well as the business premises.

 

-           Documents to be furnished: The Documents relating to the import of goods is going to have a major role to play in case of this scheme. Only when proper documents are maintained at all the time, can the scheme be effected in its essence. Thus, under the scheme it is proposed that all the relevant records relating to importation and sale of goods will have to be preserved for 5 years. These documents will be produced by the importer before the Audit party. The draft scheme gives the specimen list of documents like bill of entry, packing list, bill of lading, invoices, freight documents, bond records, duty paying documents, etc. Further, the importer may also be required to produce the financial records to the audit party including the Annual Financial Statements, Audit reports, credit notes, journal vouchers, etc.

 

-           Procedure to be followed in on-site audit: It is proposed that the procedure for On-site Audit to be followed will be similar to the Central Excise Audit procedure which is done in line with EA-2000. Further, the full process to be followed by the importer and the audit party has been elucidated in the draft scheme. The procedure is more or less similar to a normal audit process. The guidelines have been given in the draft scheme regarding the selection of assessees, desk review, gathering information about the importer, internal control and revenue risk analysis, developing audit plan, site visit, verification, summarization of audit findings, reviewing the audit results, compliance of audit objections and future compliances. 

 

WHILE WINDING-UP:

 

The perusal of the scheme proposed for On-site audit in context of Post Clearance Audit (PCA) for Imports shows that the success of the scheme would depend on the full cooperation of the importer. The importer will have greater responsibility towards the goods which are being imported and will have to maintain near perfect records.

 

The timeliness or promptness of the audit will be the backbone of success of this scheme. This is due to the fact that since the physical verification will not be done at the time of import, so it would be essential to carry out the audit as soon as possible else the goods will be disposed off. In such cases, the goods may not be physically verified at all. This will make it impossible to check the quality of the goods imported. In such cases, this scheme will prove to be a weapon for the ill-intended importers. Further, this scheme will fail at the places where there is shortage of staff. The shortage of audit personnel will delay the audits of that area and every second of delay will defeat the custom conventions.

 

Anyhow, this procedure will facilitate the importers who will be saving a lot of time as well as money due to easy and quick clearance of goods. On the other hand, the risk lies with the customs of keeping the track of the imported goods with regard to the quality and quantity.

 

In the nutshell, on-site audit will serve its purpose only if done on time and in cases where the importers maintain the records genuinely without making undue advantage of this scheme.

 

Over and above all, this scheme is a good step taken by the government to facilitate the importers. However, time will tell whether the good beginning makes a good end or not…

 

**********

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