Discuss the validity of the following independent cases under the provisions of CGST Act, 2017: (i) CGST officer had issued a notice under section…

CA Final · Indirect Tax Laws · MTP · November 2024
Discuss the validity of the following independent cases under the provisions of CGST Act, 2017: (i) CGST officer had issued a notice under section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 against which appeal was preferred by the assessee. Appellate Authority concluded that the notice issued under section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 was not sustainable for the reason that charges of fraud had not been established. Now the officer wishes to determine the tax payable by treating the said notice as if it was issued under section 73(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Is the action of the officer valid? (ii) CGST officer issued an adjudication order which did not specify payment of interest on the tax short paid by the registered person. So, the assessee contends that interest cannot be demanded as the said order is silent on the same. Is the contention of the assessee correct?

Suggested Answer and Working Notes:

(i) Valid. As per section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017, if the Appellate Authority concludes that the notice issued under section 74 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 is not sustainable for the reason that the charges of fraud has not been established, the proper officer can determine the tax payable by deeming as if the notice was issued under section 73 (1) . (ii) Incorrect. As per section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017, the interest on the tax short paid or not paid shall be payable whether or not the same is specified in the order determining the tax liability.

Topics: Appeals and Revision

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic