Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

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 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

Limitation for GST fraud proceedings and parallel-enforcement bar shape validity of a composite demand-cum-show-cause notice

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Notification extending the annual return due date for 2017-18 did not extend the department's time to initiate Section 74 fraud proceedings; no separate extension notification for Section 74 was shown, and the March 2021 communication was only a scrutiny notice, not a valid show cause notice. For 2018-19 and 2019-20, parallel CGST proceedings on excess availment of input tax credit were barred where SGST had already initiated action on the same subject matter, making that part of the notice without jurisdiction. The short-payment component, however, was distinct from the SGST mismatch proceedings and could be pursued. The composite order was set aside and remitted for fresh adjudication only on the issues lawfully open to the authority.....