Abhishek Raja Tax Wisdom by ARR (FREE)

Abhishek Raja Tax Wisdom by ARR (FREE)

5/13/2025, 1:51:39 AM

CANCELLATION OF GST REGISTRATION FOR NON-FILING OF GST RETURNS FOR CONTINUOUS SIX MONTHS - A Critical Analysis A taxpayer's GST registration can be cancelled if returns aren't filed for six months. The officer will issue a notice (Form GST REG-17) giving seven days to respond. Without response, cancellation occurs via Form GST REG-19. This prevents GST collection and ITC claims, stressing timely compliance. Krishanu Borthakur - Gauhati High Court (2025) 26 CENTAX 334 Where registration of assessee works contractor was cancelled for not filing returns for a continuous period of six months, registration was to be restored, otherwise any statutory dues that might be required to be deposited by petitioner would not be deposited which would not be in interest of revenue. 2/7 Kiran Enterprises - Uttarakhand High Court (2025) 92 GSTL 533 Where registration was cancelled for non-filing of returns for continuous period of six months, while petitioner was ready to pay all balance tax, interest and late fee, petitioner was to be liberty to move application for revocation of its cancelled registration. 3/7 Sunil Sah - Uttarakhand High Court (2024) 23 CENTAX 273 GST registration cancelled for non-filing of returns for six months; assessee allowed to apply for revocation within two weeks, subject to filing pending returns and paying dues. 4/7 Bansal Exim - Delhi High Court (2024) 22 CENTAX 404 Petitioner-assessee failed to furnish returns for continuous period of six months. Where SCN issued by revenue did not propose cancellation of assessee’s GST registration with retrospective effect, cancellation of assessee’s GST registration with retrospective effect from date of grant, was in violation of principles of natural justice; assessee’s registration was to be restored to enable assessee to file its returns. 5/7 Pranabesh Sarkar - Calcutta High Court (2024) 22 CENTAX 314 Where assessee’s registration was cancelled for failure to file returns for continuous period of six months, but respondent-authority’s case was not that assessee was adopting dubious process to evade tax, suspension/cancellation of registration would work against interest of revenue; impugned order was to be set aside subject to conditions. 6/7 M.S. Rainbow Products - Delhi High Court (2024) 21 CENTAX 22 Where assessee's GST registration was cancelled on account of failure to furnish returns under Section 39 for a continuous period of six months, GST registration was to be restored on condition that assessee would immediately file necessary returns and pay all its dues along with interest. 7/7

Abhishek Raja Tax Wisdom by ARR (FREE)

5/14/2025, 2:02:11 AM

Is Pre-Show Cause Notice (Form DRC-01A) under Rule 142(1A) mandatory? Thoughts, Insight and Research by: Abhishek Raja Ram, 9810638155 Remember these High Court judgments to challenge direct DRC-01 issues, especially "without prejudice to." Learn to challenge a notice on multiple grounds. Bookmark for future reference. 1. Yaduka Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. - Supreme Court (2022) 66 GSTL 385 Where Show Cause Notice issued without pre-show cause notice consultations was directed by High Court to be considered as communication for pre-SCN consultations, and thus, assessee was given sufficient opportunity to satisfy authorities, principles of natural justice stood substantively complied. .2. Eden Real Estates (P.) Ltd. - Calcutta High Court (2024) 159 taxmann com 540 Where Revenue Authority had issued show cause notice without considering or discussing assessee's detailed reply to pre-show cause notice, show cause notice was set aside. 3. Diamond Beverages Pvt. Ltd. - Calcutta High Court (2023) 157 taxmann com 479 Where assessee had replied to pre-show cause notice, but show cause notice issued under section 73(1) without due application of mind and without considering assessee's reply to pre-show cause notice and without conducting any inquiry or investigation, show cause notice was to be set aside. 4. DS Chewing Products LLP (2025) 171 taxmann com 190 Where assessee challenged tax liability imposed upon him in purported exercise of power by Assessing Authority under section 73 and contended that it was mandatory for authority to have issued a pre-show cause notice but no pre-show cause notice was issued, there appeared to be violation of mandatory provisions of law; matter required consideration. 5. Gulati Enterprises - DelhiHigh Court (2023) 68 GSTL 237 Pre-show cause notice consultation is mandatory under unamended Rule 142(1A) of CGST Rules, 2017; voluntary statement of assessee quashing same could not substitute such pre-show cause notice consultation. 6. Saumya Agroech Pvt. Ltd. - Calcutta High Court (2022) 145 Taxmann com 154 Show Cause Notice issued without pre show cause notice consultations should be considered as communication for pre-SCN consultations and assessee should submit his objections and Assessing Officer should to fix a date for pre-SCN consultation. Note: The Supreme Court has affirmed this case in Yaduka Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. [(2022) 66 GSTL 385] Practice Tip: Rules don't override the Act. Section 74 sets penalties at 15% pre-show cause and 25% post-show cause. Issuing an SCN directly removes the chance for a 15% penalty, though SCNs often include it. Challenging the procedure might help save on tax, interest, and penalties. I hope you will find this useful. Abhishek Raja Ram 9810638155

Abhishek Raja Tax Wisdom by ARR (FREE)

5/19/2025, 1:42:36 PM

🧠💼 *AI for Tax Professionals* – The Ultimate Combo is HERE! 🚀 Want to reply to notices faster, draft professionally, and master PPTs, Excel, and AI tools? We’ve bundled *3 powerful sessions* into ONE unbeatable offer: ✅ *How to Draft Replies to Notices & Create PPTs Using AI Tools* _– 1 hour 27 minutes_ ✅ *Advanced Session on AI Applications for Tax Professionals* _– 30 minutes_ ✅ *AI Prompting for Tax Professionals – Work Smarter, Not Harder* _– 2 hours 11 minutes_ 🎁 Bonus: 📘 *AI Prompts eBook* 📒 *30-Day AI Prompting Workbook* 💥 *Now at ₹399/-** 💸 *Use Code `SPECIAL100` to Get ₹100 OFF!* *(Only for the first 100 users)* 🎯 Learn AI from scratch. No tech background needed. 100% practical. 👇 *Tap the link to know more* and start your AI journey today! https://araonline.mojo.page/-master-ai-for-tax-professionals-combo

Abhishek Raja Tax Wisdom by ARR (FREE)

5/15/2025, 2:02:11 AM

GST is of the next level in complexity. It is so loosely drafted that we find contrary views at every point. One such provision is 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐝 𝟏 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐡? 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐜𝐮𝐭𝐭𝐚 𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐊𝐚𝐦𝐥𝐚 𝐒𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐬: 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐝. Where assessee’s appeal against recovery order was rejected in first appeal on ground of limitation without taking note of grounds for condonation of delay, in view of fact that assessee had already made pre-deposit and had also prayed that by reasons of lack of proper knowledge of GST portal, there was delay in filing, there was no lack of bona fide on part of assessee, appellate authority was to be directed dispose of appeal on merit. 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐡𝐢 𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐋𝐋𝐏: 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐝.Provisions of Limitation Act, 1963, particularly Section 5, cannot be invoked to condone delay in filing appeal beyond prescribed period of three months plus one month under CGST Act, 2017. In my humble view, two things are immediately needed: 1) When two High Courts have divergent views, it's time for the Honourable 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐭𝐨 intervene and clarify the position and 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐟 𝐢𝐧 𝐛𝐨𝐧𝐚 𝐟𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐮𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐬. 2) 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 come up with an A𝐦𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐲 𝐒𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐦𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐎𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 passed under section 54, 73, 74, 122, 125, 129, 130 and others. Please share your views.

Abhishek Raja Tax Wisdom by ARR (FREE)

5/18/2025, 3:11:52 PM

वचनेशते नापि वस्तुनोऽन्यथाकरणशक्ते: Continuing the journey of learning Sanskit Maxims, this week's maxim is: Vachane Shate Naapi Vastu No Anyathakaranashakte: English Meaning: A fact cannot be altered by a hundred texts. अगर पसंद आये और कुछ अलग करने की कोशिश अच्छी लगे, तो liek & share कर देना !! Essence of the Maxim: This Sanskrit maxim expresses a fundamental principle in law and jurisprudence: "Once a fact has occurred, no amount of textual or theoretical discussion can undo or alter it." It recognises the primacy of factual reality over theoretical constructs or rules. Equivalent Latin Maxim “Quod fieri non debuit, factum valet” (That which ought not to have been done, yet being done, is valid) Also referred to by the shorthand: "Factum Valet". Application in Legal Context Recognition of Completed Facts: Even if something has been done contrary to the law, if the act is completed and irreversible, and rights have been created, the law may recognise its validity to prevent greater injustice. Doctrine of Factum Valet in Hindu Law: This maxim has found considerable application in Hindu personal law, especially in validating marriages that may not comply with all ceremonial requirements. For example: A marriage lacking some formalities, if consummated and lived through, may still be treated as valid under this doctrine. De facto vs. De jure: The maxim reflects the principle that de facto realities sometimes override de jure norms, especially when attempting to reverse the fact would cause injustice, hardship, or disrupt settled rights. Estoppel and Finality: The maxim can also support principles of estoppel, where a person may be barred from denying a fact which has already occurred and been accepted or relied upon. Conclusion: “वचनेशते नापि वस्तुनोऽन्यथाकरणशक्ते” is a powerful reminder that law is not just about what should be, but what is. This maxim protects the sanctity of facts and discourages endless legal disputation that attempts to undo what has been factually established. The Latin counterpart “Factum Valet” complements this thought in Western legal tradition. Thanks for reading Abhishek Raja Ram 9810638155