CA in Jaipur | CA. Yogesh Jangid |ITR Filing 2023 | Company Registration | NGO Registration | Income Tax Raid Cases | Audit | Inc Incroporation | CPA in India | Subsidy | Project Funding | GST | GST Raid Cases | Income Tax Notice Faceless | DRI Cases |

Delhi High Court Invalidates Demand Order Due to Lack of Recorded Personal Hearing

editor — Fri, 05 Apr 2024 06:05:12 +0000

The Delhi High Court recently ruled on a GST case involving Electra Power Transmission Systems and the Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Service Tax.

Facts of the Case

Held

The main issue was whether the demand was justified given the petitioner's claim of appearance and attempted compliance, marred by administrative errors.
The petitioner argued that they did attend the hearing and submitted a reply, but due to an office error, crucial documents weren't uploaded. They sought another chance to present their case fully, with all necessary documentation.
The respondent maintained that the petitioner's response was unsatisfactory and noted their absence at the hearing, justifying the demand based on procedural defaults.
The Delhi High Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the case for re-adjudication. The court instructed the petitioner to submit all relevant documents and be given another hearing. No comment was made on the merits of the arguments, preserving all rights.

category

High Court of Gujarat Rules on GST Case

editor — Thu, 04 Apr 2024 04:44:00 +0000

In a significant legal development, the High Court of Gujarat has recently issued a noteworthy ruling in the case of OTSUKA PHARMACEUTICAL INDIA PVT LTD versus UNION OF INDIA. This ruling addresses a crucial aspect pertaining to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, particularly focusing on the retrospective application of amendments to Rule 108 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The case, denoted as R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13209/210/212/213/215 of 2023, reached its culmination on 27th March 2024.

Facts of the Case:

The petitioner, OTSUKA PHARMACEUTICAL INDIA PVT LTD, contested against the UNION OF INDIA, asserting that Rule 108(3) of the CGST Rules should not be applicable in their situation. They contended that their online appeals were based on the Order-in-Original made available by the adjudicating authority.
The crux of the issue revolved around the requirement for the petitioner to submit the decision or order being appealed against within seven days of filing the appeal under sub-rule (1) of Rule 108, and the subsequent issuance of a final acknowledgment by the appellate authority indicating the appeal number.

Held:

The High Court determined that the petitioner was indeed obligated to adhere to the stipulated timeline for submitting the decision or order appealed against, as outlined in Rule 108.
While acknowledging the justifiability of the appellate authority's rejection of appeals due to delays, the Court referenced the Minutes of the 48th Meeting of the GST Council. This documented the Council's acceptance of recommendations put forth by the Law Committee.
According to these recommendations, when an order subject to appeal is issued or uploaded on the common portal and is accessible to the appellate authority, the necessity for the appellant to furnish a certified copy of such an uploaded order becomes inconsequential due to its online availability.
Consequently, the retrospective effect of the amendment to Rule 108, effective from 26th December 2022, was affirmed by the Court as being clarificatory in nature.
In light of this clarification, the impugned order passed by the appellate authority rejecting the appeal on grounds of delay was deemed untenable. Therefore, the High Court proceeded to quash and set aside the impugned order.

category

Extension of FCRA Registration Certificate Validity by Government until June 30, 2024

editor — Sat, 30 Mar 2024 11:07:57 +0000

The government, in the interest of the public, has opted to prolong the validity of FCRA registration certificates. For entities whose certificates were previously extended until March 31, 2024, and are awaiting renewal, the extension will now last until June 30, 2024, or until their renewal applications are processed, whichever comes first. Likewise, for FCRA entities whose 5-year validity period ends between April 1, 2024, and June 30, 2024, the validity will be extended until June 30, 2024.

Access the full notice here: https://www.nyca.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/fc_notice_28032024.pdf

category

Delhi High Court Alters Retrospective Revocation of GST Registration

editor — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 04:52:32 +0000

In the legal case of Supreme Enterprises versus Principal Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax, North Delhi, the Delhi High Court recently deliberated on the matter of retroactively canceling GST registration.

Facts of the case:

The petitioner contested an order issued on 07.07.2023, which retroactively annulled their GST registration starting from 18.01.2022. This cancellation stemmed from a show cause notice dated 06.06.2023, citing non-compliance with return filing requirements. However, the notice lacked specificity and failed to afford the petitioner adequate opportunity to respond.

The petitioner had previously sought cancellation of their GST registration multiple times due to business closure, but these requests were denied. Subsequently, they received a show cause notice lacking in detailed explanations or justifications.

The order for cancellation lacked clarity and reasoning, casting doubt on its validity. It did not sufficiently explain the grounds for cancellation or the resulting liabilities, nor did it justify the retroactive nature of the cancellation.

Held:

The court stressed that retrospective cancellation of GST registration must be grounded in objective criteria and not solely on non-compliance with return filing obligations. It recognized the significant ramifications of such cancellations for both the taxpayer and their customers, particularly concerning input tax credit.

Taking into account the petitioner’s cessation of business operations, the court amended the contested order to cancel the registration effective from the date of business closure, i.e., 26.07.2022. The petitioner was instructed to adhere to the necessary regulations outlined in Section 29 of the CGST Act, 2017.

Nevertheless, the court clarified that the authorities could still pursue steps for recovering any outstanding dues, including retrospective cancellation, in accordance with the law.

category

Registration not to be cancelled retrospectively when vague SCN is issued and no reasonable opportunity granted to file reply

editor — Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:25:25 +0000

The Delhi High Court, in the case of M/s. Friends Media Add Company vs. Principal Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax [W.P.(C) No. 1260 of 2024 dated February 12, 2024], altered the GST cancellation ruling to apply prospectively from the date of the show cause notice (SCN). The court held that GST registration should not be revoked retroactively if the SCN lacks clarity and no opportunity was given to contest the retrospective cancellation.

Facts of the case:

The Revenue Department (referred to as “the Respondent”) issued an SCN on August 25, 2023, to M/s. Friends Media Add Company (referred to as “the Petitioner”), alleging issuance of invoices or bills without actual supply of goods or services, resulting in improper claim of input tax credit or tax refund. Subsequently, the GST registration of the Petitioner was cancelled retroactively via an order dated December 12, 2023 (referred to as “the Impugned Order”).

The Petitioner challenged the Impugned Order through a writ petition before the High Court, arguing that the SCN lacked specificity as it did not cite any instances of invoices or bills issued without actual supply of goods or services, which formed the basis of the SCN issuance.

Issue:

Whether GST registration should be cancelled retrospectively when the SCN issued is vague in nature and no opportunity was granted to file objection against retrospective cancellation?

Held:

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 1260 of 2024 held as under:

Section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, empowers the Proper Officer to cancel GST registration retrospectively, but this should not be done mechanically and must be based on objective criteria.
The mere failure to file returns for a certain period should not automatically lead to retrospective cancellation, especially if returns have been filed and taxes paid for other periods.
The Proper Officer must consider that retrospective cancellation could deny credit to the petitioner's customers for supplies made during the affected period.
The SCN did not adequately notify the petitioner of the possibility of retrospective cancellation.
The petitioner was not given an opportunity to object to the retrospective cancellation of GST registration.
Therefore, the court ordered that the cancellation be modified to operate prospectively from the date of issuance of the SCN.

category

CBDT Issues Guidelines on Income Tax Appeal Filing to Reduce Litigation

editor — Tue, 19 Mar 2024 06:24:06 +0000

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular No. 5/2024 dated March 15, 2024, under Section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, providing guidelines for the Department’s appeal filings before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), High Courts (HCs), and for Special Leave Petitions (SLPs)/appeals before the Supreme Court (SC) with the aim of reducing litigation. This circular supersedes Circular No. 3/2018 from July 11, 2018, Circular No. 17/2019 from August 8, 2019, and a board letter dated August 20, 2018.

In line with the guidelines, monetary limits and other conditions for filing departmental appeals under the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been specified for ITATs, HCs, and SC. However, exceptions have been provided where the decision to appeal or file an SLP shall be based on merits without regard to the tax effect and the monetary limits.

These exceptions include cases where:

It contained Any provision of the Act or the Rules or notification issued thereunder has been held to be constitutionally invalid.on both external and internal assets generated or acquired during the relevant financial year under various tax categories such as CGST, SGST & IGST, and HSN codes.
Any order, notification, instruction, or circular of the Board or the Government has been held to be illegal or ultra vires the Act.
The assessment is based on information related to any offence received from law enforcement or intelligence agencies.
Prosecution has been filed by the Department in the relevant case and the trial is pending.
Strictures/adverse comments have been passed against the Department.
The tax effect is not quantifiable or not involved, such as in the case of registration of trusts or institutions.
Addition relates to undisclosed foreign income/undisclosed foreign assets.
Cases involving organized tax evasion or accommodation entries.
Mandated by a Court’s directions.
Writ matters.
Matters related to wealth tax, fringe benefit tax, equalization levy, and other matters outside the Income Tax Act.
Litigation arising out of disputes related to TDS/TCS matters.

The Circular further clarifies that appeals or SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed specified monetary limits for ITAT, HCs, and SC. The tax effect is defined as the difference between the tax on the total income assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable had the total income been reduced by the amount of income in respect of the disputed issues.

Additionally, procedures for calculating the tax effect in cases involving TDS/TCS are outlined, and reporting mechanisms are established to ensure compliance with the Circular’s provisions.

The Circular aims to streamline the appeals process, reduce unnecessary litigation, and provide clarity to taxpayers on their Income-tax assessments. It emphasizes the importance of deciding on appeal filings based on the merits of each case and encourages the resolution of disputes in a fair and efficient manner.

Source: https://www.nyca.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Circular-No.-5-2024-Filing-of-appeals-by-Dept.pdf

category