Introduction: The GST landscape is marked by a peculiar term – “Voluntary Payment,” as encapsulated in the enigmatic DRC-03 form. Despite the seeming contradiction, this term has found its way into the intricate web of GST procedures, sparking debates over its legitimacy and implications. This article delves into the nuances of voluntary payments in the GST realm, particularly focusing on the contentious DRC-03.
Debunking the Notion of Voluntariness: The term “Voluntary Payment” raises eyebrows, for payments under any legal framework should not be deemed voluntary. This contradiction becomes apparent when juxtaposed against the mandates of A.265. However, in the race to meet targets, the semantics seem to take a backseat.
Own Ascertainment vs. Voluntary Payment: Don’t misguide “own ascertainment” with “voluntary payment” as they are not making donations via DRC-03. “Own ascertainment” is nothing more than self-assessment that should be discharged through a valid return.
Legal Limits and Form Constraints: There is no assumption in law, nor excess delegation be allowed. Quoting <drop down> in the Forms can’t liberate the executive government to provide for “anything” without amending the form itself. S. No. 3 and 4 are mutually exclusive (Check FORM DRC-03).
Levy Discharge Dynamics: Either “self-assessment” or “by demand” discharges the burden of levy. Only a liability (PMT-01) can be paid nothing else. Demand can only be made and intimated (results in a debit in liability register) under a valid section following the legal principles. Any proceedings cannot be demand proceedings but may result in such, accordingly any other “cause of payment” is illegal and unwarranted.
Challenges in Self-Assessment: Self-assessment is not an assessment by the officer and even if, discharge can only be made through a valid return. Pre-demand recovery (during audit or enforcement) is nothing but extortion (illegal) even if self-paid.
Mandatory Intimation through DRC-01A: AOs or IOs are not POs under demand proceedings. Intimation u/s 73/74 (5) cannot be oral but mandatory through DRC-01A.
Resolving Discrepancies in Returns: Ways to resolve the intimated difference in R-1/2B and R-3B should be either justification or addition/reversal in/from the next tax period’s liability/ITC rather than routing the self-assessment through DRC-03.
Executive Government’s Role and Legislative Boundaries: Any FORM mandating anything out of the will of the legislature is the will of the executive government and an attempt to legislate where their role should be limited to execution.
Conclusion: In its current state, the GST law, especially concerning “Voluntary Payment” through DRC-03, appears to be in need of a profound overhaul. The discrepancies, legal grey areas, and potential pitfalls in the current system signal an impending need for legislative refinement. As the saga of voluntary payments unfolds, stakeholders anticipate a recalibration of GST laws to align with both legal principles and practical exigencies.
Author Bio
