amendment to Rule 142A

[Vel Murugan]

Rule 142A has been amended by Notification No. 79/2020-CT dated 15.10.2020, replacing the word 'shall' with 'may' and it is effective from that date. Whether this amendment is applicable for the DRC-01 for the FY 2017-18? In other words, the issue of DRC-01A is a must for SCN for the years 2017-18 to 2019-20.

[PAWAN KUMAR]

Dear Sir,

As per my view, The amendment is effective from the date of 15.10.2020, although replacing the word, it means the proper officer may issue DRC-01A for the past FY 2017-18 also.

[Padmanathan KV]

I agree. To my understanding, after 15-10-2020, the officer "may" issue DRC-01A. It is irrelevant for which FY he is issuing SCN.

[KASTURI SETHI]

(i) After 15.10.20, if DRC-1A is issued today it will cover past period also.

(ii) The word, 'SHALL' signify mandatory factor. It was mandatory for the Proper Officer and now it is not mandatory for the Proper Officer.

(iii) The word, 'MAY' excludes mandatory factor. Now Proper Officer will decide keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case. In other words, 'discretionary' factor.

 

[Padmanathan KV]

Dear querist,

2023 (10) TMI 1246 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT - M/S. NEW MORNING STAR TRAVELS VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THE UNION OF INDIA

The above decision is in your favour. However with due respect, I am not in agreement with the ratio.

[PAWAN KUMAR]

Yes, I fully agree with View of Sh.Kasturi Sir.

AI Summary

GST Rule 142A amendment makes DRC-01A notices discretionary, debated for retroactive application to 2017-2020 fiscal years. An amendment to GST Rule 142A, effective from 15.10.2020, changed the word 'shall' to 'may,' affecting the issuance of DRC-01A notices. Participants in the discussion debated whether this amendment applies retroactively to fiscal years 2017-18 to 2019-20. The consensus was that post-amendment, the issuance of DRC-01A is discretionary, allowing officers to issue notices for past periods based on case specifics. A referenced court decision supports this interpretation, although one participant expressed disagreement with its reasoning.