Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

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 :

rcm for fy 2020-21

giri gattupalli

respected sir,

notice under sec-74 is issued for a taxable person for FY 2019-20 based on audited P&I submitted along with FORM 9C, for payment of RCM in respect of expenditure incurred for transport charges, found in profit & loss account .it seems that , as the limitation period lapsed for issuing notice under sec-73, authorities opted for alternative route of issuing notice under sec-74.

whether notice under sec 74 is valid for non-payment of RCM? .please discuss sir

Debate on GST Notice Under Section 74 for RCM: Abuse of Power or Justified Action? A query was raised regarding the issuance of a notice under Section 74 of the GST Act for non-payment of Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) for the fiscal year 2019-20. The notice was issued after the limitation period for Section 73 had lapsed. Respondents argue that Section 74 requires proof of tax evasion through fraud or misrepresentation, which is not applicable here as the RCM is recorded in audited statements. Some believe the notice is an abuse of power and should be contested, while others highlight that Section 74's applicability depends on case specifics. The discussion emphasizes the importance of proper legal procedures and the burden of proof on authorities. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues