Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

ITC AVILED BUT NOT UTILIZED

Rauf Khan

With Due Respect I want to say that at the time of filling November GSTR-3B . I wanted to take ITC ₹ 5817623 but due to typical mistake I put the value ₹ 58173623 although in the month of January I reversed all excess ITC which I put wrongly even I did not utilized any excess ITC. When I concerned about this matter with my jurisdiction officer he told me you need to deposit interest on reversed ITC but when I calculate it is very high and I am not able to give such interest.

Please guide me so that i can get relief from this problem

Individual Faces Interest Demand for Excess ITC Claim; Advisor Suggests Applying for Relief Under Bombay HC Directive An individual mistakenly claimed an excessive Input Tax Credit (ITC) of 58,173,623 instead of 5,817,623 on their GST return. Although the excess ITC was reversed without utilization, the jurisdiction officer demanded interest on the reversed amount. An advisor suggested that, as per a Bombay High Court directive, the individual should manually apply for relief, citing the error as unintentional. The court had previously directed the government to allow rectification for similar errors. The advisor recommended meeting with a higher departmental officer to resolve the issue and avoid interest charges. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues