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: 15 Jul, 2014
Print   |    |  Comment

GOVERNMENT HEADING TOWARDS E-COLLECTION OF TAXES

GOVERNMENT HEADING TOWARDS E-COLLECTION OF TAXES

An article by:
CA Pradeep Jain,
CA Neetu Sukhwani &
Kushal Shah
 

Introduction:- The Hon’ble Finance Minister, Mr. Arun Jaitley in his budget speech delivered on 10th July, 2014 had expressed his desire to create an e-biz platform that is aimed to create a business and investor friendly ecosystem in India by making all business and investment related clearances and compliances available on a 24X7 single portal, with an integrated payment gateway. It was stated by him that all Central Government Departments and Ministries will integrate their services with e-biz platform on priority basis by 31st December, 2014. With a view to implement and effect the said technological change, amendments have been made in the recent budget 2014-15 by making payment of excise duties and service taxes mandatory through internet banking. However, discretion has also been given to the Assistant/Deputy Commissioners to allow payment of taxes via any other mode in exceptional circumstances on reasons to be recorded in writing. This article is an attempt to analyse the above change introduced by the government.

History:-
The government followed the practice of collecting the taxes manually through challans. However, with the technological advancement, the method of collection of taxes also changed and gradually, the government resorted to facilitate tax collections electronically. This may be better observed if we look at the series of amendments being made from time to time as follows:-
The proviso to Rule 6(2) as regards electronic payment of service tax was first introduced by the Service Tax (Fourth Amendment ) Rules, 2006 with effect from 01.10.2006 which read as follows:-

The assessees shall  deposit the service  tax liable to be paid by him with the bank designed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs for this purpose in Form TR-6 or in any other manner prescribed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs:

“Provided that the assessee, who has paid service tax of rupees fifty lakhs or above in the preceding financial year or has already paid service tax of rupees fifty lakhs in the current financial year, shall deposit the service tax liable to be paid by him electronically through internet banking.”

Thereafter, this limit was reduced by the Service Tax (Amendment Rules), 2010, w.e.f. 01.04.2010 vide Notification no. 01/2010-ST dated 19.02.2010 wherein the proviso was substituted as follows:-

 “Provided that where an assessee has paid a total service tax of rupees ten lakh or more including the amount paid by utilisation of CENVAT credit, in the preceding financial year, he shall deposit the service tax liable to be paid by him electronically, through internet banking.”

Subsequently, this limit was further reduced w.e.f. 01.01.2014 vide Notification no. 16/2013-ST dated 22.11.2013 to Rs. One Lakhs.  

Similarly, amendments have been also effected in the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and the same are summarized as follows:-
 
The third proviso to Rule 8 regarding manner of payment of excise duty was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2007 by Notification no. 08/2007-CE (N.T.) dated 01.03.2007 which provided that an assessee who has paid total duty of Rs. Ten lakhs or more including the amount of duty paid by utilisation of cenvat credit in the preceding financial year, shall thereafter, deposit the duty electronically through internet banking.
 
The limit specified in the proviso was substituted from Rs. 10 Lakhs to Rs. 1 Lakhs w.e.f. 01.01.2014 vide Notification no. 15/2013-C.E. (N.T.) dated 22.11.2013.
 
Amendment vide Notification no. 09/2014-ST w.e.f  1st October,2014 :-

In rule 6 of the said rules, for sub-rule (2), the following sub-rule shall be substituted with effect from the 1st  October, 2014, namely:-

“ (2) Every assessee shall electronically pay the service tax payable by him, through internet banking:
Provided that the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, having jurisdiction, may for reasons to be recorded in writing, allow the assessee to deposit the service tax by any mode other than internet banking.”
 
Simultaneously, similar amendments have been made in the Central Excise Rules, 2002 vide Notification no. 19/2014-C.E. (N.T.) dated 11.07.2014 wherein it has been stated as follows:-
 
After sub rule (1A) of Rule 8, the following sub-rule shall be inserted w.e.f. 01.10.2014, namely:-
 
(1B) Every assessee shall electronically pay duty through internet banking:
 
Provided that the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, for reasons to be recorded in writing, allow the assessee payment of duty by any mode other than internet banking.”
 
Implication of Amendment:-
 
With effect from 01.10.2014, every assessee will be required to pay excise duty and service tax payable by him electronically through internet banking and there is no other option available except in certain peculiar circumstances. Therefore, with the technological advancement, the government has also adopted advanced means of revenue collection. However, realising the fact that still there are villages in the country that are not equipped with sufficient internet facilities, a proviso has also been added wherein the powers have been given to the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner to allow the assessees for reasons recorded in writing to deposit excise duty or service tax by any mode other than internet banking. But, the facility of making payment of excise duty or service tax by any other mode is not available to every assessee and it is dependent on the desire and discretion of the revenue officers. Moreover, the reasons for allowing payment to be made by other mode are also not mentioned which may lead to controversies and unnecessary litigation. All that we can hope is that in the desire to collect taxes electronically, the government does not harass the small assessees who are unable or incapable to pay taxes electronically due to lack of adequate facilities because even in the present times there are certain remote areas in the country that are not even connected with uninterrupted electricity.  
 
 

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