CA Sharad Jain

CA Sharad Jain

INTRODUCTION :

Recently, several amendments have been made to CGST Rules, 2017 vide Notification No. 36/2017 dated 29.09.2017) (F. No. 349/58/2017-GST(Pt.)) whereby (apart from some other amendments) powers to extend the date for submission of TRAN-1 have been inserted in Rule 118, 119 and 120. This amendment appears to have been made to remove some anomalies existing in the Rule 118, 119 and 120.

AN ANOMALY  :

The liability to submit GST FORM TRAN-1 is independently contained in Rule 117, 118, 119 and 120. According to these rules the above form is to be submitted within the period of 90 days from the appointed day. This time limit of 90 days is independently mentioned in all the above four rules. Therefore it is necessary that if any amendment is made or notification etc. is issued regarding the same, it should contain the reference of all the above four rules.

It is mentionable here that before above amendments, the powers to extend the above period were contained only in rule 117. There were no powers to extend the same in rule 118, 119 and 120 despite the fact that the due date for submission for TRAN-1 is independently mentioned in all the four rules.

Recently before above amendment, the due date for submission of TRAN-1 has been extended to 31st October, 2017 vides Order No. 03/2017-GST dated 21.09.2017 (F. No. 349/58/2017). That order was also for “Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under Rule 117 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. There was no reference of the other Rules 118, 119 and 120 in that.

Though after notification 36/2017, the powers to extend the date for submission of TRAN-1 for rule 118, 119 and 120 are now available but the notification for extension of date for the purpose of the rule 118, 119 and 120 is still not there. The notification for extension of date is only Order No. 03/2017 which contain reference of only Rule 117 and not of any reference for rule 118, 119 and 120.

Though vide amendment made through notification no 36/2017, linking has been made between the provisions of section 117 and 118, 119 and 120 but the same may not enhance the scope of previous order no. 03/2017 which is of earlier date. If this opinion is adopted controversy will always be there. However, this linking will be fully effective if there will be any further date extension for submission of TRAN-1 in future. In future a single notification referring only rule 117 may be sufficient.

CONCLUSION : This controversy is required to be removed by revising Order No. 03/02017 or by issuing new notification for extension of due date for original submission of TRAN-1 for the purpose of rule 118, 119 and 120 also.

Click here to Know the Role of GST Practitioner?

Author Bio

More Under Goods and Services Tax

2 Comments

  1. CA SHARAD JAIN says:

    Though vide amendment made through notification no 36/2017, linking has been made between the provisions of section 117 and 118, 119 and 120 but the same may not enhance the scope of previous order no. 03/2017 which is of earlier date. If this opinion is adopted controversy will always be there. However, this linking will be fully effective if there will be any further date extension for submission of TRAN-1 in future. In future a single notification referring only rule 117 may be sufficient.

  2. SCA SHARAD JAIN says:

    Though vide amendment made through notification no 36/2017, linking has been made between the provisions of section 117 and 118, 119 and 120 but the same may not enhance the scope of previous order no. 03/2017. If this opinion is adopted controversy will always be there. However, this linking will be fully effective if there will be any date extension for submission of TRAN-1 in future. In future a single notification referring only rule 117 may be sufficient.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *