Goods and Services Tax

Denial of input tax credit during transition to permanent registration needs reconsideration for lack of reasoning.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that the denial of input tax credit to the petitioner by the respondent authority requires reconsideration. The respondent failed to consider the petitioner's contention that the payments for which input tax credit was sought were made against the provisional registration number before the permanent registration number was granted. There were n

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Frequently Asked Questions on IMS
GST
Dated:- 23-9-2024

With the Introduction of Invoice Management System (IMS), the taxpayers interaction with invoices and business processes will change. This innovative feature empowers taxpayers to seamlessly accept, reject, or keep invoices pending in the system to avail later as and when required, streamlining the reconciliation process, and ensuring greater accuracy and efficiency in GST compliance. Frequently asked questions (FAQs) on IMS to get a better understanding of the new functionality.
Thanks,
Team GSTN
Frequently Asked Questions: Invoice Management System (IMS)
Sr No.
Question
Reply
1.
What is Invoice Management System (IMS)?
Invoice Management System (IMS) is a facility in GST system, where the invoices/records saved/filed by the supplier in GSTR-1/1A/IFF, can be accepted, rejected or kept pending by recipients in order to correctly avail ITC.
2
How can I access IMS?
IMS can be accessed using below p

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

pending record and the invoices/records belongs to future tax period shall remain in IMS.
6
When will the documents be flown to IMS?
The documents will be available in IMS as soon as they are saved by the supplier in their corresponding GSTR-1/1A/IFF.
7
When can the recipient taxpayer take action on a record?
As soon as a supplier/ taxpayer saves an Invoice/ records in GSTR-1/1A/IFF, it is shown and is available to the recipient taxpayer in IMS for taking actions.
8
What all documents will not be made available in IMS but will be part of GSTR-2B?
Below records will not be part of IMS but will directly flow to GSTR-2B:
* Document flowing from the following forms:
* GSTR 5
* GSTR 6
* ICEGATE documents
* RCM records
* Document where ITC is ineligible due to:
* POS rules
* Section 16(4) of CGST Act
* Documents where ITC to be reversed on account of Rule 37A
9.
Who will have access to IMS functionality?
Taxpayers registered as normal taxpayers (incl

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

s also been filed
12
Can I take actions multiple time on a document?
Yes, action can be taken multiple times on an invoice/record before filling of GSTR 3B. In case of multiple actions on a record, latest action will overwrite the previous action. However, the action taken will be frozen at the time of filing the corresponding GSTR-3B by the recipient.
13
What happens to the original record if the same record is amended by the supplier?
If original and amended record belongs to 2 different GSTR 2B return period, then it is mandatory to take action on original record and file the respective GSTR 3B before taking action on amended record (amended through GSTR-1/1A/IFF). In case if recipient take the action on amended record first then system will not allow to save the action in IMS.
In case both the original records and amended records belong to same period GSTR-2B, the action taken on amended records will prevail over the action taken on original record.
14
What will h

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

r the cut-off dated of GSTR-2B. Saved records unless filed will be considered as “no action” committed and thus will flow as the status of the record that existed before saving for GSTR-2B generation.
16
What If I have taken an action on a document in saved status but the same is edited/changed by the supplier before filing his GSTR-1?
In case a saved record is edited before filing of GSTR-1 by the supplier, the amended record will replace the saved document in IMS and the action taken on such record by the recipient will be reset. Thus, the edited record will be available for recipient for fresh action in IMS.
Similarly, if a document is deleted before filing of GSTR-1/1A/IFF by supplier then such document will be removed from IMS also.
17
Will Reverse Charge document received from registered suppliers also form part of IMS ?
No, RCM invoices are not part of IMS but will continue
to be part of GSTR-2B as it is being reflected today.
18
As a taxpayer what all will I

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

ill be made available in the IMS for action by the recipient.
20
What will happen to the documents in IMS on filing of GSTR 3B by recipient?
All the accepted/rejected records belonging to a particular GSTR-2B period will be removed from IMS on filing of GSTR-3B for that particular period.
21
What will happen to the documents kept pending in IMS?
Pending records will continue to be in IMS till the time of cut-off date as per section 16(4) of CGST Act, 2017.
Once records crossed the timeline prescribed in section 16(4) of CGST Act, it will be removed from IMS.
22
Can I download all the data available in IMS?
Yes, excel download facility is available to download the IMS data .
23
What is draft GSTR 2B?
GSTR-2B will continue to be generated on 14th of every month with the same logic as current GSTR-2B which will now be considered as draft GSTR 2B. This draft will consist of all the accepted / deemed accepted records and rejected records. Here, rejected records are

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

ly taxpayers, GSTR-2B will not be generated for the months M1 and M2 of the quarter. However, GSTR-2BQ for the quarter (M1, M2 and M3 combined) will be generated on 14th of Q+1 month and re-computation of 2B will be allowed on or after 14th of Q+1 month till filing of corresponding GSTR-3B. The same logic as is there for monthly GSTR-2B / 3B will be applicable.
28
What will happen to GSTR- 2A?
GSTR-2A shall continue to be generated as it is.
29
Is it mandatory to re- compute GSTR 2B?
If there is any change made by recipient on IMS dashboard after draft GSTR 2B generation by system, it is mandatory to re-compute GSTR 2B
30
How to take an action on records available on IMS dashboard
* Action on Individual record: To take action on individual record, recipient can select the action by clicking on the radio button available at line-item level and then click on save button to save the action taken.
* Action on multiple records: To take action on multiple records in one g

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

mpute GSTR 2B at the time of filing gstr 3B and take corresponding ITC in the GSTR 3B for Oct'24.
32
Can a supplier amend FCM invoice to RCM invoice and what will the impact on the ITC?
Yes, the supplier can amend an Invoice from FCM to RCM subject to the time limit as per GST law.
The system shall reduce the ITC of the amended FCM Invoice in case the said invoice was accepted by the recipient.
Further, the RCM invoice shall flow to GSTR 2B of the recipient.
33
Can the place of supply be changed by the supplier in the GSTR 1 and what will be the impact on the ITC?
Yes, place of supply can be changed by the supplier in the GSTR 1 subject to the time limit given in the GST law.
Further if the ITC become ineligible due to change in place of supply, then recipient should reverse the ITC in the Table 4B1.
34
What will happen if the recipient rejects the original Credit Note or upward amended Credit Note?
If the recipient rejects the Credit note and furnished the GSTR

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

+ Full Amount
– Delta
Nil
Reject
Nil
Pending
Pending
Nil
Accept
+ Full Amount
– Delta
Nil
Reject
Nil
Pending
CN
Accept
– Full Amount
– Full Amount
Nil
Reject
Nil
+ Full Amount
Pending
Not Allowed
CNA
Upward
Accept
– Full Amount
Accept
– Delta
– Delta
Nil
Reject
Nil
+ Delta
Pending
NA
NA
Reject
Nil
Accept
– Full Amount
– Full Amount
Nil
Reject
Nil
+ Full Amount
Pending
NA
NA
Pending
Not Allowed
Not Allowed
CNA
Downward
Accept
– Full Amount
Accept
+ Delta
+ Delta
Nil
Reject
Nil
Pending
Nil
Reject
Nil
Accept
– Full Amount
Nil
Pending
NA
Not Allowed
Pending
Not Allowed
Not Allowed
RCM to Forward charge
RCM to FCM –
Inv/DN
Accept
+ Full Amount
+ Full Amount
Nil
Reject
Nil
Pending
Nil
RCM to FCM – CN
Accept
– Full Amount
– Full Amount
Nil
Reject
Nil
+ Full Amount
Pending
Not allowed
Not Allowed
FCM

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Bail Denied in Forgery Case: Court Emphasizes Severity of Economic Crimes and Accused's Avoidance of Legal Proceedings.
Case-Laws
GST
This case deals with the issue of granting bail in a case involving forgery, creation of fake GST firms, and related economic offenses. The key points are: The court held that the present case is one of forgery and not related to GST, hence the accused cannot claim the benefit of bail granted in other GST cases. The court analyzed the concepts of inquiry, investigation, and trial under the Criminal Procedure Code, concluding that the arguments raised by the accused regarding jurisdiction have no merit. The court examined the applicability of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which deals wi

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Court Dismisses Jurisdictional Challenge to GST Show Cause Notice; State Officer's Authority Upheld for Interstate Dealings.
Case-Laws
GST
The Court rejected the petitioner's challenge to the show cause notice (SCN) issued u/s 74 of the CGST Act on jurisdictional grounds. The petitioner failed to submit a reply to the SCN, which emanated from a GST audit report after examining records for specific periods. The objection regarding the officer's lack of jurisdiction over the petitioner's

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Court Overturns Decision on Business Location; Orders Review of Evidence and Response to Show Cause Notice.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that the respondents' conclusion of the petitioner's principal place of business being non-existent at the time of physical verification was ex facie erroneous. The conclusion was based solely on purported enquiries from nearby shop owners, without mentioning their names or details in the Field Report. Cancelling a taxpayer's registration solely o

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

High Court: Certified Copy Not Needed for Appeals if Order Available Online; Quashes Rejection of Appeal, Orders Rehearing.
Case-Laws
GST
In light of the amended Rules 108 and 109 of the GST Rules effective from 26th December 2022, the High Court held that when an appealed order is issued or uploaded on the common portal and can be viewed by the appellate authority, submitting a certified copy of such uploaded order for authenticity becomes insignificant. Therefore, the appellate author

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Refund of IGST from e-cash register allowed despite non-compliance with Section 49(6); appellate order binding.
Case-Laws
GST
Rejection of refund of IGST lying in electronic cash register on grounds of non-compliance with Section 49(6) of CGST Act, 2017 was held untenable. The appellate authority's order directing refund issuance cannot be withheld by respondents without challenging it in higher forum. Respondents directed to process refund claim per appellate order along with applicabl

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Apex court strikes down GST circular on ITC refund for inverted tax structure, orders fresh adjudication.
Case-Laws
GST
The High Court held that Circular No. 135/15/2020-GST, which dealt with the refund of Input Tax Credit (ITC) accumulated due to the Inverted Tax Structure, was in conflict with Section 54(3)(ii) of the Act. The Appellate Authority had allowed the appeal solely relying on this Circular, which did not withstand judicial scrutiny. Consequently, the impugned order was set

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Tax laws upheld: Delayed challenge of GST cancellation dismissed due to non-compliance with statutory provisions.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner failed to challenge the matter within statutory provisions and raised the constitutional validity of Section 29(2) under CGST and BGST Acts. The court found the decision in Rohit Enterprises persuasive but not binding. While the facts differed, the hardship was similar to a previous case where the constitutional guarantee to carry out trade and c

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Petition review dismissed – no error evident; order passed sans objection.
Case-Laws
GST
The review petition filed u/s 114 read with Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was dismissed as the petitioner failed to establish any mistake or error apparent on the face of the record. The impugned order was passed in the presence of the learned counsels without objection, and being an appealable order, the High Court did not find any grounds for review. The review petition l

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Clarification Sought on GST Rate for Ship Supplies; Classification Consistent with Customs Bill of Entry.
Case-Laws
GST
The applicant sought clarification on the applicability of GST rate under notification No. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) for imported goods/spares supplied on ships. The applicant claimed these goods are essential parts of the ship to make it seaworthy. However, the HSN explanatory notes of Chapter 89, under which the applicant wants the goods classified after import, excl

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Violation of natural justice: Bail cancellation without appellant's counsel.
Case-Laws
GST
Violation of principles of natural justice due to absence of appellant's counsel during proceedings. High Court noted counsel's absence on certain dates, but matter reserved on 29.04.2024 without hearing. Unexpectedly relisted on 18.07.2024 without counsel's presence. Impugned order cancelling bail passed on 25.07.2024 without hearing appellant's counsel who had obtained bail from trial court. Imp

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Court Affirms State Authority's Lead in Investigations, Prevents Central Intervention u/s 6(2)(b) of the Act.
Case-Laws
GST
The court held that Section 6(2)(b) of the Act treats the empowered officers under the SGST/UGST Act at the central level to be at par and does not prescribe for transfer of investigation from State authority to Central authority or vice-versa. The object of Section 6(2)(b) is to avoid multiple proceedings on the same subject matter. Once the State authority initia

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Delay in GST appeal beyond limitation period uncondoned despite 2023 notification.
Case-Laws
GST
Original order confirming GST demand was passed without opportunity of hearing. Appeal dismissed on limitation ground. Notification dated 02.11.2023 allows condonation of delay for appeals filed before 31.01.2024 against orders passed before 31.03.2023 u/ss 73/74 of GST Act. Impugned order passed on 20.07.2023, after 31.03.2023 cutoff date, hence notification inapplicable. Cited judgement de

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Tax law amendment restricting input tax credit availability challenged; court seeks reconsideration.
Case-Laws
GST
The imposition of a time limit for availing Input Tax Credit (ITC) is violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 300A of the Constitution of India. The insertion of sub-section (5) u/s 16 of the CGST Act, effective from July 1, 2017, provided that for invoices or debit notes pertaining to Financial Years 2017-18 to 2020-21, the registered person could take ITC in any return fi

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Bail Denied in GST Fraud Case: Applicants Linked to Fake Firms and Unexplained Deposits; Court Stresses Economic Crime Severity.
Case-Laws
GST
In the present case involving economic offenses related to GST fraud, the court denied bail to the applicants. The applicants were found to be connected with Sanjay Dhingra in transactions involving fake GST firms registered using stolen PAN and Aadhaar details. The money trail and financial transactions revealed unexplained huge amounts being de

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Penalty for tax evasion & undervaluation during goods detention; pay tax+penalty on market value to release goods.
Case-Laws
GST
Writ petition concerning levy of penalty u/s 129 of CGST Act for alleged tax evasion and undervaluation during detention of goods. Court permitted petitioners to pay tax and penalty calculated on market value determined by authorities within one week. Upon receipt of payment, authorities directed to release detained vehicle and goods within seven days thereaft

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST registration cancelled retrospectively without valid reasons; authority overstepped, order modified for prospective effect.
Case-Laws
GST
The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled retrospectively without indicating specific reasons, violating principles of natural justice. While the authority can cancel registration retrospectively u/s 29(2) of the CGST/DGST Act, the decision cannot be arbitrary. The show cause notice did not propose retrospective cancellation. The impugned or

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Search & seizure of sales records from sister company, unable to reply notice.
Case-Laws
GST
Search and seizure operations conducted by respondent No. 3 on petitioner-Company's sister entity premises, seizing material like sales registers, accounts books, and data. Petitioner unable to file detailed reply to Show Cause Notice due to seized documents. Court accepted petitioner's explanation, set aside impugned orders, and remanded matter to respondent No. 2 for reconsideration of reply s

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Refund of input tax credits & 'intermediary' status u/s 2(13) IGST Act remanded for fresh consideration by Appellate Authority.
Case-Laws
GST
Appellate Authority's orders regarding refund of accumulated input tax credit with interest and determination of petitioner's status as an 'intermediary' u/s 2(13) of IGST Act set aside. Matters remanded for reconsideration by Appellate Authority to provide opportunity to both parties to present claims and contentions afresh within stipulated time

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Goods transit sans docs: No penalty if invoices/e-way bills exist.
Case-Laws
GST
This case pertains to the refund of penal amounts or taxes paid for goods seized due to lack of proper documentation during transit. The court held that the movement of goods accompanied by e-way bills, tax invoices, or delivery challans from the originating state shall be treated as bona fide and not attract any penalty or tax under the GST regime. The court agreed with the precedent set by the Andhra Prad

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Assessee's reply to pre-notice communication not mandatory; dismissing writ plea against pending GST proceedings.
Case-Laws
GST
Non-consideration of reply given pursuant to GST DRC-01A notice violates principles of natural justice. Rule 142(1A) merely allows proper officer discretion to issue communication, not adjudicate submissions. Right of assessee arises only after show cause notice u/r 142(1)(a) with hearing opportunity. Affording hearing at different stages not contemplated by le

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Delayed appeal rejected despite justification; partial fee paid; no ill-intent; tardy filing not beneficial: Appeal restored.
Case-Laws
GST
Appeal dismissed on ground of limitation despite ex

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Taxpayer wins right to rectify adverse tax order; Authority directed to consider application fairly.
Case-Laws
GST
Section 161 allows an affected person to apply for rectification of an order. The authority had previously passed an order and decided no rectification was necessary, which the assessee felt adversely affected them. The High Court set aside that order, directing the authority to deal with the rectification application in accordance with law. The rectification process is sep

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Order canceling registration quashed; non-application of mind, lack of reasoning, violation of natural justice.
Case-Laws
GST
Cancellation of registration order quashed due to non-application of mind, absence of reasons, and violation of principles of natural justice. Court followed precedent where non-reasoned order was set aside, allowing petitioner to file reply to show cause notice. Impugned orders liable to be set aside, original order dated February 22, 2023 quashed and set aside,

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =