Just a moment...

Top
Help
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws

×

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 :

Rule 86B Annual payment of 1% differential liab

ARVIND JAIN

As per Rule 86B of GST, dealer has to pay 1% of input via the cash ledger only on a monthly basis. but dealer has paid it on lumpsum basis at year end, Is this allowable or does differential tax have to be paid via DRC 03 for shortfall in monthly payments? This point was raised in GST Audit visit, in Actual for respective FY 21-22 no tax was payable and the dealer has paid it all together in March 22 (as per monthly total difference) instead of monthly. No change in total figure. Any remedy now?  Can we claim it as a refund for tax paid by filing RFD form.

Goods and Services Tax: monthly 1% cash-payment requirement challenged when dealer paid year-end; issue of refund or penalties arises. The differential-liability rule requires monthly payment into the cash ledger of a specified proportion of input tax; the question is whether an end-of-year lump-sum payment that equals the aggregate monthly amounts satisfies the monthly-payment obligation or must be regularised through the shortfall payment procedure, with consequences limited to interest and potential penalties subject to waiver on grounds of a procedural lapse and an identified challenge to the rule's vires. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Ganeshan Kalyani on Jan 29, 2026

If no tax was payable then the tax paid is merely a payment. You can seek refund u/s 54.

ARVIND JAIN on Jan 30, 2026

Tax was  payable but as  per rule it should  be monthly and we paid at year end in March

Sadanand Bulbule on Jan 30, 2026

Since the liability was eventually met, you cannot claim a refund, but you should argue that the monthly delay is a procedural lapse rather than tax evasion to waive potential interest or penalty.

KASTURI SETHI on Jan 30, 2026

Only interest is payable for delayed payment of tax in cash. No issue of refund arises. Being a minor procedural lapse, the party may request for waiver of penalty taking shelter of Board's circular and case laws available on the ground of minor procedural lapse. The element of ""evasion" does not exist in this scenario. 

Shilpi Jain on Jan 31, 2026

Also have a look at this decision AM Enterprises - 2024 (9) TMI 1485 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT which has noted that this rule is ultra vires.

 

ARVIND JAIN on Feb 5, 2026

Thanks to all for your review and feedback on the issue. 

+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues