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 :

Explanation 1 to section 74

kapil bokadia

as per explanation 1(ii) of section 74-

where the notice under the same proceedings is issued to the main person liable to pay tax and some other persons, and such proceedings against the main person have been concluded under section 73 or section 74, the proceedings against all the persons liable to pay penalty under 1[sections 122 and 125] are deemed to be concluded.

Is there any case law available on such issue?

GST Proceedings Under Section 74: Penalties Conclude for Others When Main Offender's Case Ends; Fraudulent Input Tax Credit Involved. A discussion on the Goods and Services Tax (GST) under section 74 addresses the conclusion of proceedings against individuals liable for penalties once the main person responsible has their case concluded. A query was raised about available case law on this issue. A respondent suggests referring to specific legal citations and an article on penalties under section 122. They explain that such situations often involve fraudulent claims of Input Tax Credit under section 132(1)(b) & (c) of the Central GST Act, 2017. The adjudicating authority must determine the main person responsible for these offenses. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Sadanand Bulbule on Feb 27, 2025

Refer the following citations:

2024 (6) TMI 667, 2024 (3) TMI 1277

Also refer my article dated 10/02/2022 on " Penalty Under Section 122" published on TMI.

Sadanand Bulbule on Feb 27, 2025

Normally such situation arises in fraudulent availing and passing on of Input Tax Credit u/s 132(1) (b) & (c) of the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017. Considering the facts and circumstances of each case, the nature of the offence and the material on record, the adjudicating authority has to establish who is the MAIN PERSON. 

In terms of the opening phrase of Section 132, whoever commits, or causes to commit and retain the benefits arising out of any of the offences listed therein has to be established and adjudicated under Section 74.The primary benefit is the benefit of ITC to reduce the output tax payable by the recipient of such fake tax invoices without the receipt of goods/services/both. In my opinion. he is the MAIN PERSON liable for adjudication under Section 74.

 

+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues