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 :

Not paid 1% of tax by Cash as per RULE 86B

Shailander Jain

In one of our client, we have not paid 1% of output tax by Cash ledger in February 2021 month GST 3B considering Rule 86B. However we have paid 1% tax by cash ledger for Jan 2021 and March 2021 month. Now department issue notice to deposit 1% for the month of Feb 2021 month with Interest. However in May 2021 GSTR-3B we have deposit more then 1% tax by cash ledger due to all Credit ledger balance utilized. Can department consider the May 2021 month cash deposit for Februrary 2021 month due. Please suggest and guide if there are any remedies for this.

Client missed 1% output tax payment for Feb 2021 under GST Rule 86B; may contest notice citing court decision. A client failed to pay 1% of the output tax by cash ledger for February 2021 under GST Rule 86B, though payments were made for January and March 2021. The tax department issued a notice to deposit the missing amount with interest. The client paid more than 1% by cash ledger in May 2021 due to credit ledger utilization. They seek advice on whether the May payment can cover the February shortfall. Respondents suggest contesting the notice, referencing a court decision declaring the rule ultra vires, and emphasize contesting to avoid setting a precedent. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Shilpi Jain on Oct 27, 2024

AM Enterprises V State of Himachal Pradesh - 2024 (9) TMI 1485 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

Have a look at this decision. It has held that this rule is ultra vires.

So contest the matter on this ground. Though I know the demand may not be huge. 

KASTURI SETHI on Oct 28, 2024

It is a matter of issue which is worth fighting.. Amount may be small, if not contested, it will become precedent. So must contest.

Ganeshan Kalyani on Oct 29, 2024

I agree with the view of the experts.

+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues