Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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 : 119329
- 0 -

DENIAL OF ITC DUE TO SUPPLIERS REGISTRATION HAS BEEN CANCELLED UNDER SECTION 29(2)(e)

Date 28 Sep 2024
Replies5 Answers
Views 3668 Views
Asked By

DEAR EXPERT,

MY QUERY IS UNDER.

I am manufacturing firm. I am purchasing raw material from different suppliers. Sometimes we are purchasing from agents. So we dont know the supplier personally. We have received 3 different DRC-01 for the F.Y. 2018-19 stating that suppliers registration cancelled suo moto. hence ITC need to reverse. initially they have issued summon to us and we have supplied documents as they required. but off the record, they told us that when ever any suppliers GST number cancelled we demand ITC from the receipient too. in one notice they even not issued DRC-01A. We have documents like invoice, E-way bill, payment proof. What can be done in this case.

5 answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
- 0
Replied on Sep 29, 2024
1.

Dear querist

The general observation is that If the registration was live as on the date of purchases of goods/services, then you have a strong case and judicial rulings are in your favour.

However the subject purchases are alleged to have been made from the dealers involved in fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts in terms of Section 29[2][e], then it is difficult for you to convince the authorities satisfactorily as regards to the entitlement of ITC on such purchases, unless you strongly substantiate all the conditions of Section 16 with unimpeachable evidences.

Reply
Hide
- 0
Replied on Sep 29, 2024
2.

If you do not intend to reverse ITC with applicable interest u/s. 50, then be prepared for a long drawn battle with the department.  To assist, you may keep the following documents ready, viz.

a) Supplier tax invoice - please check if the supplier invoice conforms to the details mandated as per Rule 46

b) e-way bill

c) Vehicle details with ack. of the your company taking delivery

d) Payment details for the said invoice

e) Proof for physical movement of the goods to the location of the recipient, etc.

Kindly also scrupulously follow paradigm SC ruling in the case of Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited - 2023 (3) TMI 533 - SUPREME COURT.  Thanks  

Reply
Hide
- 0
Replied on Sep 30, 2024
3.

If the supplier registration was active at the time you took the credit, its a good case to fight. Though the battle will take time and some money as well.

Look at the amount and the cost involved to decide. 

2018-19 is a period when these provisions were not in place. So all the more a good case to fight.

Reply
Hide
- 0
Replied on Sep 30, 2024
4.

Dear querist

Please note that the provisions of Rule 86A of the CGST Rules may also play its role in the situation explained by you.

Reply
Hide
- 0
Replied on Sep 30, 2024
5.

Dear Querist,

The burden of proof is cast upon the department regarding the allegation of fraud etc. There is a plethora of judgements  available on this issue in your favour. You have been dragged into litigation. 

Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues