GST: Tamil Nadu issues Circular regarding Allowing New Registrations to Avoid Bill Traders

The Goods and Services Tax (GST), Tamil Nadu State Department has issued a circular regarding allowing of new registrations to track and avoid bill traders.

In the important matter of avoiding bill traders while allowing new registrations under GST, the Tamil Nadu Government as part of taking appropriate remedial measures, empowering the Jurisdictional Proper Officers viz., AC, STOs, and DSTOs to undertake pre-verification of new applications with matching parameters of 1) Place of business 2)PAN 3) Mobile No. 4) Email ID 5) Authorized signatory and 6) Bank account details.

This is in the light of official reports where 771 bill traders involving revenue of ₹1,648 crores have been detected by the Department and the respective registrations were canceled and action is being pursued against the beneficiaries (purchasers claiming improper ITC).

These steps are quite useful in avoiding the bill traders from again entering the GST fields.

A circular issued on Wednesday stated that “Our experience shows that the bill traders after getting registrations, issue invoices without the supply of goods or services for huge amounts within a short span of time. The Department comes to know about the bill trading activities only when he files a return on the 20th day of the subsequent month, by which time he disappears from the declared place or is non-existent even from the date of registration, leaving no trail to find them out by the Department. Again the bill traders come into the system with a different name and continue the same bill trading activity. Hence, it is imperative that the Department has to strengthen the scrutiny of the new registration applications in a robust manner to identify the bill traders at the entry-level itself.”

“Hence it is instructed that any application for new registration filed has to undergo the process of matching with the database as to whether any of the following six parameters pertaining to canceled registration found to have been matched with details provided in the application for new registration, to invariably undertake pre-verification of the business premises, by the jurisdictional proper officer as per the notification in the reference cited, so as to deter the bill traders from applying for new registration,” the circular said.

The IT wing shall make available the above list to the proper officer of the base circle on a daily basis, it added.

GST: Karnataka issues Circular regarding Revocation of canceled GSTIN beyond 90 days based on Court

The GST department, Karnataka State has issued a circular regarding revocation of cancelled GSTIN beyond 90 days by LGSTO’S/SGSTO’S based on Appeal order/High Court orders.

As per Section 29(20c). the proper officer may cancel the registration of a person from such date, including any retrospective date, as he may deem Sc. where any registered person has not furnished returns for a continuous period of six months. A taxpayer whose registration is cancelled by the proper officer can apply for reversal of such cancellation of GST registration by applying Form GST REG-21.

Now a module has been developed and tested in order to revoke cancelled GSTIN beyond 90 days. With the help of the module – Revocation after Appeal / Court Orders, LGSTO’s/SGSTO’s can revoke cancelled GSTINs of the Tax payers who have not applied for Revocation beyond 90 days and preferred the appeal.

“This application is required to be filed within 30 days of receiving the notice for the cancellation of GST registration, this was extended fill 90 days on certain conditions. Some of the tax payers did not apply for revocation of cancelled GSTIN beyond 90 days, as the result of which the common portal did not allow filing Revocation application. Hence, in such cases, the taxpayers have to approach the appellate authorities or the high coons for the redressal of the issue,” the circular said.

The path for revocation of cancellation at GST Pro is Registration Request> Approve Revocation Request> Revocation after Appeal/High Court Order.

To enable the revocation, the proper officer has to select the GSTIN and upload the pdf copy of the Appeal order or High Court order along with the Revocation Proceedings drawn to revoke the cancelled GSTIN.

Construction Project Launched in Post-GST Era and No Pre-GST Sale for Comparison of Base Price: NAA

The National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA), has found M/s GLS Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. not guilty of profiteering since the construction project was launched in the post-GST era and no pre-GST sale for comparison of the base price.

An application was filed against the respondent M/s GLS Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. alleging profiteering in respect of the purchase of flats in ‘Avenue-51’ project. The applicant submitted that they had been denied the benefit of ITC by the respondent and the respondent resorted to profiteering in violation of the provisions of section 171 (1) CGST Act, 2017.

The respondent contended that the anti-profiteering provisions could not be applied to the project ‘Avenue-51’ as this project was not in existence before the implementation of the GST and was launched in the GST regime. The respondent further submitted that the Environment Clearance etc require for the construction of the project is received of the date of implementation of GST. The DGPA concluded that the project ‘Avenue-51’ was launched in the post-GST era and there was no price history of the units sold in the pre-GST era which could be compared with the post-GST base price to determine whether there was any profiteering.

The Coram of Mr. Amand Shah, Chairman, Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Technical Member and Mr. Hitesh Shah Technical Member has observed that the it could be concluded on the basis of Environment Clearance, that the project started after coming in force of GST, hence there had been no additional benefit of ITC to the respondent and hence he is not require to pass on the benefit to the applicant by reducing the prices of the flats. The applicants could have availed the benefit only if the project was under execution before GST era, then the respondent would have been eligible to avail ITC on the purchase of goods and services after implementation of GST, on which he was not entitle to do so before GST.

The Authority has held that the respondent had not contravened the provisions of section of 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 and find no merit in the application filed by the applicant and the same was dismissed.