ICAI issuing GST invoice only in members name in their Individual capacity

vswami says:

INSTANT (Tentative personal remarks- simply intended to serve as a backdrop, in order to provoke further thoughts):

The member’s ‘grievance’, all the more so the ICAI’s ‘closing remark’, are not readily understood.

Even granting / conceding one’s limited knowledge, of the GST law, in theory- with no practical exposure, there being no need, following are the aspects which may have to be borne in kind :-

A ) GSTN, in the case of a professional, such as a CA, is a requirement for compliance by ‘the person’ who is accountable for consideration received , for ‘services’ attracting the levy of tax, in his hands.

B ) For the purposes of income-tax, briefly said, In the case of a ‘FIRM’ , within its meaning of sec 2 (23), read together with sec 10 (2A), a partner’s share in the total income of the firm, taxed in its hands, is not taxable in the hands of its partner.

So far as one is aware , the same position holds good even for GST purposes. Premised so (open to correction, if not so), one would have thought it is the FIRM (inclusive of a LLP) who has to apply for and hold a GSTN in its name; not the partners, individually.

C ) Regarding the ICAI’s indicated move to seek and procure a ruling from the AAR, on its members’ behalf, one’s honest gut feeling is, before doing so, it will not but be prudent to keep in focus the following:

1) Any ruling of the AAR will be binding on the ‘applicant’ ; subject to , if aggrieved , the right to go in appeal to the AAAR, for a final verdict .

2. It is seen to be not beyond doubt that, even if ICAI, in its representative capacity, goes ahead and succeeds in obtaining a Ruling, problem could arise if that turns out to be adverse to its members.

3. Lastly, in any event, approach to the AAR may have to be considered and decided, keeping in full focus the inherent perils as envisaged and given vent in certain concerned quarters based on practical experience. in he recent past.

(May cross refer the Previous Posts)

Courtesy

June 3, 2018 at 4:23 pm

2 Comments

vswami says:

RIDER

One of the earlier related Posts . https://taxguru.in/goods-and-service-tax/gst-advance-ruling-authority.html


June 4, 2018 at 6:44 am
vswami says:

INSTANT (Tentative personal remarks- simply intended to serve as a backdrop, in order to provoke further thoughts):

The member’s ‘grievance’, all the more so the ICAI’s ‘closing remark’, are not readily understood.

Even granting / conceding one’s limited knowledge, of the GST law, in theory- with no practical exposure, there being no need, following are the aspects which may have to be borne in kind :-

A ) GSTN, in the case of a professional, such as a CA, is a requirement for compliance by ‘the person’ who is accountable for consideration received , for ‘services’ attracting the levy of tax, in his hands.

B ) For the purposes of income-tax, briefly said, In the case of a ‘FIRM’ , within its meaning of sec 2 (23), read together with sec 10 (2A), a partner’s share in the total income of the firm, taxed in its hands, is not taxable in the hands of its partner.

So far as one is aware , the same position holds good even for GST purposes. Premised so (open to correction, if not so), one would have thought it is the FIRM (inclusive of a LLP) who has to apply for and hold a GSTN in its name; not the partners, individually.

C ) Regarding the ICAI’s indicated move to seek and procure a ruling from the AAR, on its members’ behalf, one’s honest gut feeling is, before doing so, it will not but be prudent to keep in focus the following:

1) Any ruling of the AAR will be binding on the ‘applicant’ ; subject to , if aggrieved , the right to go in appeal to the AAAR, for a final verdict .

2. It is seen to be not beyond doubt that, even if ICAI, in its representative capacity, goes ahead and succeeds in obtaining a Ruling, problem could arise if that turns out to be adverse to its members.

3. Lastly, in any event, approach to the AAR may have to be considered and decided, keeping in full focus the inherent perils as envisaged and given vent in certain concerned quarters based on practical experience. in he recent past.

(May cross refer the Previous Posts)

Courtesy


June 3, 2018 at 4:23 pm