...

Thank you!

We’ll respond to your request shortly. In the meantime….

Get our best advice, every week

Every week, 315000 entrepreneur wait to hear from us on best of GST, Income tax, Company Law and other important updates. It is the V J M & Associates LLP newsletter. Subscribe below or connect with us on Linkedin, Facebook, Twitter or youtube.

Just want to received updates from us

Subscribe the list of more than 200000 subscribers

Read on Goods and Service Tax

CBIC issued Guidelines on initiation of recovery proceedings before expiry of 3 months from the date of service of order

CBIC issued Guidelines on initiation of recovery proceedings before expiry of 3 months from the date of service of order

Due date of issuance of Assessment order under Section 73 has lapsed for FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19 on 31st December, 2023 and 30th April, 2024 respectively. In the cases where demand is raised through DRC-07, the taxpayer may either prefer an appeal with Commissioner (Appeals) or opt to pay tax determined through demand order. As per Section 78 of CGST Act, the taxpayer is given a time period of 3 months to make payment of an amount determined to be payable by any order under GST.

Read More »
ITC is inadmissible on inward supply used for construction of godown meant for commercial renting

ITC is inadmissible on inward supply used for construction of godown meant for commercial renting

The Applicant is constructing Industrial buildings which are to be rented out as godowns for commercial purposes. The Applicant is seeking advance ruling on the question that whether the Applicant is entitled to claim ITC on inward supply of goods or services used for construction of such godowns. The Applicant contended that Section 17(5)(d) of CGST Act is not applicable in the given case as the godowns are not to be used for furtherance of business. Rather, such godowns themselve are a source of income. Further, as per Article 14 of Constitution of India, ITC can’t be denied on ground of “equal protection of law”.

Read More »
ITC is allowed on inward supply of cars used for demonstration purpose

ITC is allowed on inward supply of cars used for demonstration purpose

The applicant is an authorised agent of Mercedes Benz India and is engaged in supply of car, spare parts and services. The applicant purchases demo cars from MB India and such cars are kept for demonstration and test drive purposes for a specific period of time. After completion of specified cars, such demo cars are purchased by the applicant from MB India and sold further to the end customer. Loss on sale of such demo cars, if any, is reimbursed by the MB india to the applicant.

Read More »
Penalty can’t be imposed on the employee as they are not registered or taxable person

Penalty can’t be imposed on the employee as they are not registered or taxable person

The Petitioner is an employee of a Company M/s MLIPL, which is appointed as steamer agent of M/s Maersk. The petitioner was assisting M/s MLIPL against GST Compliance and was holding power of attorney to represent before tax authority on behalf of M/s Maersk. During the course of investigation, it was alleged that M/s Maersk has availed ineligible ITC and has made wrongful distribution of ITC. A SCN was issued to the petitioner asking to pay INR 1561 Crores equivalent to the tax alleged to be evaded by M/s. Maersk. Notice was issued under section 74 of CGST Act invoking Section 122(1A) and section 137 of CGST Act.

Read More »
The demand order is set aside as issued post cancellation of GST registration and opportunity of being heard was not given

The demand order is set aside as issued post cancellation of GST registration and opportunity of being heard was not given

The Hon’ble High Court contended that as GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled therefore, the petitioner has little reasons to monitor the GST portal. As per principle of natural justice, the petitioner should be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the matter is remanded back for reconsideration.

Read More »
Proceedings can’t be initiated under Section 74 when tax liability is already discharged along with interest

Proceedings can’t be initiated under Section 74 when tax liability is already discharged along with interest

The petitioner is engaged in the business of generation of electricity through solar plants. The GST returns filed by the petitioner for the period of July, 2017 to March, 2019 were subject to audit. The petitioner was informed about tax liability during audit proceedings on account of wrong availment of ITC and ITC availed with respect to exempted supply. Upon receipt of initial audit observation, the petitioner discharged the entire tax liability alongwith interest. The final audit report was issued much after payment of GST liability. Post audit, the respondent issued show cause notice to the petitioner under Section 74 of CGST Act and confirmed the demand through DRC-07. The petitioner contended that it falls under purview of Section 73(1) and 73(5) of CGST Act and therefore, SCN under section 74 is not sustainable. Whereas, the respondent contended that this is the case of fraud and willful misstatement.

Read More »