Friends,
At the outset, consensus prevails across members in the present query that the provisions of Section 20 of IGST Act and Rule 2 of IGST Rules is to be read in context to respective sections / rules in CGST Act.
Issue of Querist is the “Restriction of time limit for availing ITC on Bill of Entry”, which again has been reiterated by Sh. Kasturi ji that “Yes” restriction applies besides referring to Section 20 of IGST and Rule 2 of IGST Rules. When the said provisions are referred to, it means that all the sections pertaining to Input Tax credit, returns, etc… has to be read alongwith. Am also in agreement with Sh. Kasturi ji that yes restriction applies till filing of return under section 39 for the month of Sep of next F.Y.
Section 16(4) should not be considered as standalone for restriction of ITC. Reason being is that the proviso to said section has limited applicability i.e. ITC is allowed on 2017-18 Invoices or Debit Notes pertaining to said FY invoices which have been uploaded by supplier in his GSTR-1 (specific mention in proviso – sub section (1) of Section 37… Accordingly the amendment to this effect was made in Section 37(3) also to allow supplier to add missing invoice/ debit notes in his GSTR-1. Proviso does not applies to Bill of Entry as the said document is not to be uploaded under Section 37 of CGST Act. To conclude, proviso is inserted for giving time extension in respect of missing invoices / debit notes pertaining to said missing invoices. Proviso also does not extend time limit to other invoices which are not part of sub-section 37(1) of CGST Act i.e. RCM….
Had the said sub-section 37(1) been specified in original para of Section 16(4) confusion would not have been there. Invoice can be read as “Invoice issued by Overseas Supplier also” by department considering section 2(24) of IGST Act or Section 2(120) of CGST Act. Bill of Entry is tax paying document and Invoice of overseas buyer pertains to supply of goods. Department should have made insertion in Section 16(4) of CGST Act that “Notwithstanding contained in sub-section (1) or Sub-section (2) …….
Please also go through Section 38(2), proviso to Section 38(5), 39(9), Section 42(1)(b) of CGST Act and you may reach to conclusion as contravention of same shall be part of SCN.
Note that one can’t avoid or look for extension provisions for scenarios where tax is paid under RCM / self as those cases can never be of missing invoices.
Sh. Kasturi ji with 30+ experience had been part of department and understands the Revenue perspective very well and guide taxpayers to always have word of caution from facing litigation. Sh. Alkesh Jani ji has also addressed this issue in past that same is not free from litigations. We, professionals don’t write law but explain same. Even Court also explains and their verdict attains finality.
Appreciate the members involvement in the present issue for deep understanding as until and unless you contradict or debate, nothing fruitful comes out.