GST WEEKLY UPDATE : 42/2021-22 (16.01.2022) By CA Vipul Khandhar

By Vipul Khandhar (Chartered Accountant)

1. GePP-On new functionalities for generating E invoicing:

To help businesses to generate e-invoices, NIC has released an application known as ‘GePP-On’. To generate e-invoices using GePP-on application, you need to enter the invoice details in the form designed in the application.

Following are the features of GePP-On:

• Browser-desktop based application that works on mobile devices as well
• Generation of IRN
• Cancellation of IRN
• Generation of e-way bill number along with IRN
• Printing of e-invoice with QR Code,
• You can create customer and HSN master
• Designed to work in offline mode
• Backup and restoration of data and many such related features.

Currently, the beta version of GePP-On is released for businesses who are enabled for e-invoice generation. These businesses can use the existing login credentials to access the application. Shortly, the final version of GePP-On will be made available.

Download link to GePP: https://einv-apisandbox.nic.in/gepp/#/

The efforts to release of GePP-On application for e-invoice generation is a welcome move, not only for businesses that are already enabled for e-invoicing but also would benefit many small businesses in the coming days, when more businesses are brought under the ambit of e-invoicing.

GePP-On a better choice than business management/accounting software?

The availability of e-invoice generations tools like GePP-On and the existence of business management/accounting software might put you in confusion, whether to use to e-invoice tools or business software with e-invoice generation capability. To help you make a better choice, we have put across the business type to whom GePP-On will be useful and how business management/accounting software can help.

Business type to whom GePP-On will be useful

For businesses with fewer invoices, this will be helpful since they can generate e-invoices without going for any API integration. If you have a few invoices per day, you can manually mention the invoice details on GePP-On and generate an e-invoice. However, businesses should also make a note that this tool will only help in generating e-invoices. Managing books of accounts should be taken care of using accounting software or any other way that you are currently using.

How can business management/accounting software help?

Apart from e-invoice generation tools like GePP-On, there is business management/accounting software that comes with fully connected capabilities to generate e-invoices and e-way bills. Such accounting software not only helps you generate e-invoice instantly but also plays a key role in managing books of accounts in an integrated manner, ensuring your books and compliance are always in sync.

Using accounting or business management software, the only thing you need to do is record invoices. Based on the invoice details, your accounts are prepared, inventory is updated, and compliance data is ready. Thus, your invoicing, accounting, inventory, and compliance are always in sync with each other. When this happens, you can be assured that your financial reports give you a wholesome view of your business

2. New functionalities related to Appeal & remand back case updation:

Advisory no.1: Functionality for issue of APL-04 – Summary of the Demand for orders issued by Tribunal / Court are available in CBIC-GST application for the officers. Advisory No. 01/2022 dated 03.01.2022 and user manual are available in Antarang portal.

Advisory no.2: Functionalities for uploading appeal filed by Taxpayer for GST cases before High Court / Supreme Court and uploading Cross-objections filed by Taxpayer against appeal before Appellate Tribunal for GST cases are available in CBIC-GST application for the officers. Advisory No. 02/2022 dated 03.01.2022 and related user manuals are available in Antarang portal.

Advisory no.3: Appeal functionalities for issue of common appeal order after bunching of appeals and issue of appeal order after remand instruction order issued by Court / Tribunal are available in CBIC-GST application for the officers. Advisory No. 03/2022 dated 10.01.2022 and related user manuals are available in Antarang portal.

Advisory no.4: Appeal functionality for upload of Appeal in form APL-01 filed by taxpayer against Demand order / DRC-07 received offline is available in CBIC-GST application for the officers. Advisory No. 04/2022 dated 10.01.2022 and user manual are available in Antarang portal.

3.      De-activation of IECs not updated on the DGFT after July 01, 2020 w.e.f. February 01, 2022:

• The DGFT issuedTrade Notice 31/2021-22 dated January 14, 2021r.t. all Importer-Exporter Codes (“IECs”) which have not been updated after July 01, 2020 shall be de-activated with effect from February 01, 2022.
• All IECs which have not been updated after July 01, 2020 shall be de-activated with effect from February 01, 2022.The list of such IECs may be seen at the given link (https://www.dgft.gov.in/CP/?opt=IECDL). The concerned IEC holders are provided an opportunity to update their IEC in this interim period till January 31, 2022, failing which the given IECs shall be de-activated from February 01, 2022. Any IEC where an online updation application has been submitted but is pending with the DGFT RA for approval shall be excluded from the de-activation list. 

• It may further be noted that any IEC so de-activated, would have the opportunity for automatic re-activation without any manual interventionor any visits to the DGFT RA. For IEC re-activation after January 31, 2022, the said IEC holder may navigate to the DGFT website and update their IEC online. Upon successful updation, the given IEC shall be activated again and transmitted accordingly to Customs system with the updated status.

4. Important Judgements & AARs:

(i) Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court Regarding Extension of limitation has been applicable to refund application also:

(Applicant – Saiher Supply)

Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Saiher Supply v UOI has held that the Covid limitation suspension orders of Supreme Court apply to limitation for refund application under Section 54 of GST Act. In this case, the 1st refund application was within time. Due to issuance of deficiency memo, a fresh application had to be filed. This 2nd application was also within time. However one more deficiency memo was issued. When the 3rd refund application was filed in 30.09 2020, it was rejected by the GST authority on the ground that the same was not filed within 2 years from the relevant date.

High Court has held that since the Supreme Court has ordered that period from 15.03.2020 to 2.10.2021 has to be excluded in all proceedings, the third refund application was well within time.

(ii) Decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court Regarding Cash Credit Account of Assessee cannot be Provisionally Attached in exercise of Powers under GST:

(Applicant – Manish Scrap Traders)

The Gujarat High Court has held that the cash credit account of assessee cannot be provisionally attached in exercise of powers under GST. The applicant  has prayed for the quashing and setting aside of the order for provisional attachment of the bank account vide FORM GST DRC-22 dated 29.11.2021 issued by Respondent as the same is dehors the provisions of Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 and since the attachment of the cash credit account, not being the property of tax payer, is not permissible in law. The cash credit account in the case on hand, could be said to have been opened to enable the writ applicant to borrow the money from the Bank for the purpose of its business. Any money therefore, that the Bank may make available to the assessee would necessarily be in the nature of a loan or a cash credit facility. In either case, it would be in the nature of borrowing by the writ applicant from the Bank. In such circumstances, the Bank and the writ applicant therefore, do not have the debtor – creditor relationship. The decision of this Court in the case of Kaneria Granito Ltd. has been followed in various other matters of the present type over a period of time. Various orders have been passed over a period of time condemning the action on the part of the department in provisionally attaching the cash credit account in exercise of powers under Section 83 of the Act. The court held that the law is well-settled that a cash credit account of the assessee cannot be provisionally attached in exercise of powers under Section 83 of the CGST Act. “The order of provisional attachment of the cash credit account of the writ-applicant is hereby quashed and set-aside,” the court said.

(iii) Decision of Gujarat Highcourt Regarding Registration cancelled without proper reason cancellation order require to be set a side:

(Applicant – Vageesh Umesh Jaiswal)

A show cause notice has great significance in the adjudication proceedings for the mandatory compliance of the principles of natural justice . Show cause notice is a mandatory requirement for raising any demand under the Act, 2017 except payment of interest u/s 50 and assessment of non filer of returns u/s 62 of the act. The SCN is the foundation on which the adjudicating authority has to build up its case. It is the document served on the taxable person asking him to explain with reason as to why a particular course of action should not be taken against him. It must be a speaking and well reasoned document. The issue of SCN is not only to make aware the taxable person against whom the action is intended to be taken but must contain brief facts of case and grounds relied upon for the proposed action and language in precision, the reading of which makes the person concerned understand the case that he has to defend. It should not be issued on assumptions and presumptions. The allegations and findings in the SCN should be supported by some documentary evidences.

(iv) AAAR On No export of service if testing services are performed in India:

(Applicant – Syngenta Biosciences Private Limited)

The Authority held that in terms of Section 13 (3) the place of supply of service is in Goa, India, since in the given factual situation, the samples/goods on which the testing service is to be performed by the appellant were made available by the service recipients, which squarely fits into the situation specified under the said Section 13 (3) only. Consequently, the ‘place of supply of services’ has to be the location where this services are actually performed, which again admittedly is in Goa. And therefore that the services do not fall within ‘export of services’ vide Sec. 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017. The statutory provisions vide Section 13 of the IGST Act, 2017 are very clearly worded. That is, sub-Section (2) states that place of supply of services, except the services specified in sub-Sections (3) to (13) shall be the location of the recipient of services. Sub-Section (3)(a) is specific with regard to ‘services supplied in respect of goods which are required to be made physically available by the recipient to the supplier… in order to provide the services’. The appellant has not disputed the applicability of the said sub-Section (3)(a) to their transactions, in any manner. They have not disputed that the ‘services in respect of the goods provided by the recipient’ are actually performed in India i.e., Goa. The outcome of the services being reports which are sent to the recipient abroad or that the service recipient is concerned only with the test-report, can have no bearing or relevance, once the statutory provision is clearly, plainly and unambiguously worded, as above and it is impermissible to expand the laid down criterion or to interpolate and insert words/phrases which are not used in such provisions. As regards the second issue involved i.e., whether appellant is liable to pay IGST on the aforesaid supply of services, we find that since the supplier of service is in Goa, India and place of supply of service as determined under Section 13(3)(a) of the CGST Act, 2017 is also in Goa, India, the same falls under “Intra-State” supply of services as per Section 8(2) of the IGST Act, 2017 whereby the provisions under Section 7(5)(c) claimed by the appellant would not be applicable. Consequently, the appellant is liable to pay CGST and SGST on the aforesaid supply of service, as held by the lower authority.

Disclaimer:

This publication contains information for general guidance only. It is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although the best of endeavour has been made to provide the provisions in a simpler and accurate form, there is no substitute to detailed research with regard to the specific situation of a particular individual or entity. We do not accept any responsibility for loss incurred by any person for acting or refraining to act as a result of any matter in this publication.