Goods and Services Tax : GST IMS allows taxpayers to accept, reject or keep invoices pending before ITC flows to GSTR-3B, ensuring better GST ITC reconcili...
Goods and Services Tax : The High Court ruled that GST authorities must mandatorily apply Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST before disallowing ITC due to return...
Goods and Services Tax : The court held that Section 74 cannot be used unless fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression with intent to evade tax is specif...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn why GSTR-2B, 2A, and books differ, how mismatches occur, and the steps founders must take to claim ITC correctly and stay au...
Goods and Services Tax : How AI-powered tools streamline GSTR-2A & GSTR-2B reconciliation for Chartered Accountants. Learn about automated GST reconciliati...
Goods and Services Tax : Recent amendments in GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C have increased compliance complexity, prompting calls for extended deadlines to allow accu...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN – Upcoming changes/initiatives:- ♦ SMS based NIL Return filing for GSTR-3B and GSTR-1. ♦ Improvements in GSTR-2A to sho...
Goods and Services Tax : 1. Certain notified taxpayers have been issuing invoices after obtaining Invoice Reference Number (IRN) from Invoice Registration ...
Goods and Services Tax : Direct Taxes Professionals’ Association requested Hon’ble Finance Minister to allow filing of GSTR 9, 9A and 9C for the F.Y. 2...
Goods and Services Tax : GSTN enables taxpayers to know Input Tax Credit (ITC) eligibility at invoice level while filing Annual Return – Taxpayers ar...
Goods and Services Tax : The Karnataka High Court held that Input Tax Credit could not be denied merely because GSTR-2A did not reflect imports and SEZ pro...
Goods and Services Tax : The assessment was based on four discrepancies: reconciliation issues between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, input tax credit (ITC) mismatch ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Karnataka High Court ruled that ITC for FY 2018-19 cannot be denied merely because import and SEZ transactions were absent fro...
Goods and Services Tax : The Madras High Court remanded an ex parte assessment arising from a GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A mismatch after finding that the assessee ...
Goods and Services Tax : The High Court set aside the GST demand for fresh adjudication after finding that the authorities had not properly examined stock ...
Goods and Services Tax : Read Circular No. 193/05/2023-GST from CBIC regarding the clarification on availing Input Tax Credit (ITC) in GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A ...
Goods and Services Tax : Clarification to deal with difference in Input Tax Credit (ITC) availed in FORM GSTR-3B as compared to that detailed in FORM GSTR-...
Goods and Services Tax : It has been noticed that in a few cases, certain records are not reflected in GSTR-2B statement for the period of April 2022. Howe...
Goods and Services Tax : Condition made under sub-rule (4) of rule 36 of the CGST Rules shall apply cumulatively for the tax period February, March, April,...
Goods and Services Tax : The GST Council, in its 39th meeting held on 14th March 2020, had recommended to adopt and implement the incremental approach of...
The Karnataka High Court held that Input Tax Credit could not be denied merely because GSTR-2A did not reflect imports and SEZ procurements during FY 2018-19. It quashed the ITC demand and remanded the remaining GST issues for fresh adjudication.
The assessment was based on four discrepancies: reconciliation issues between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, input tax credit (ITC) mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A, declaration of ineligible ITC, and invalid ITC under Section 16(4) of the GST Act.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that ITC for FY 2018-19 cannot be denied merely because import and SEZ transactions were absent from GSTR-2A. The Court held that GSTR-2A did not capture such data during the relevant period, making the demand unsustainable.
The Madras High Court remanded an ex parte assessment arising from a GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A mismatch after finding that the assessee should be allowed to present its case. Relief was granted subject to deposit of 25% of the disputed tax amount.
The High Court set aside the GST demand for fresh adjudication after finding that the authorities had not properly examined stock records, GSTR filings, and transitional credit claims before confirming the demand.
The Gujarat High Court held that a GST appeal filed within the additional condonable one-month period cannot be rejected mechanically on limitation grounds. The Court ruled that appellate authorities must examine whether sufficient cause for delay has been properly explained.
GST IMS allows taxpayers to accept, reject or keep invoices pending before ITC flows to GSTR-3B, ensuring better GST ITC reconciliation.
The Karnataka High Court quashed ex-parte GST adjudication orders after the taxpayer claimed it could explain discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A returns. The matters were remanded back for fresh consideration after granting an opportunity to reply.
The case involved denial of input tax credit solely due to return mismatch without examining records. The Court held that such mechanical reliance is invalid and ordered fresh adjudication.
The court addressed denial of input tax credit due to mismatch with GSTR-2A and missing invoices. It allowed the taxpayer to seek rectification with supporting documents before the proper officer.
