9911796707
TMI BlogValidity of Improper ASMT 10 & Section 61 of CGSTX X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Validity of Improper ASMT 10 & Section 61 of CGST X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een intimated. Only the officer has intimated that assessment proceedings are initiated & for the above, the following documents are required where he has asked for complete books of accounts including Fixed assets, stock details, Debtors/creditors list. etc. Further, he has asked for personal hearing for the same, which failing to do so which result in ex parte of the case. Is the personal hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring & document requirement valid as per Section 61 of CGST? Reply By Ashika Agarwal: The Reply: No. Such type of Notice is beyond the scope of Section 61. This section is limited to scrutiny of return and related particular furnished to verify the correctness of the return. Section 37 & 38 talks about 'furnishing' and Section 39 deals with "filing of return". For calling the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents, Proper Officer have to invoke section 65 (Audit) or 70 (Summon). Reply By KASTURI SETHI: The Reply: Sub-section 3 of Section 61 of the CGST Act empowers the Proper Officer to take action under Sections 65, 66, 67, 73, 74.So Proper Officer can call for any records for scrutiny of returns. Returns are based on books of accounts. So proper Officer can call for any record or information. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Proper Officer is affording an opportunity to you to defend yourself by way of personal hearing. Hence answer to your question is yes. Reply By Amit Agrawal: The Reply: I agree with the views of Ms. Ashika Agarwal Ji. Kindly refer to an elaborate discussion we had on this issue under Issue-ID:- 118428 bearing subject-line - SCN RECEIVED Notice Under Sec 61-FY 2017.18 These are ex facie views ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of mine and the same should not be construed as professional advice / suggestion. Reply By KASTURI SETHI: The Reply: Rather than picking holes in ASMT-10 and challenging the validity of the same, wise approach is to submit the records required by the department. Why to invite other Sections ? We can not forget that Govt. is the ruler and we are being ruled over. One cannot fight with Govt. jus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t for a trivial issue i.e. submission of books of accounts. Assessee should fight on merits rather than on the issue of 'whether the department can ask for the records or not under Section 61 ? Whether to agree with my honest, sincere and impartial advice or not , it is your will as well as right. Reply By Shilpi Jain: The Reply: It is time that the department also pays attention to the va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rious provisions under the law and abides by it. These kind of challenges to the documents / notices issued by them will only make the department officers wise which will lead to a better implementation of the law. Reply By Padmanathan Kollengode: The Reply: Dear Querist, Practically, I would suggest not respond to such improper ASMT-10 at all. No demand can be made by the department without is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suing SCN u/s 73 or 74. Dear Kasturi Sir, I respectfully disagree with you sir. Section 65,67,70 etc have different checks and balances built into them [for eg:- Sec. 67 requires "reason to believe" and only officer ranking JC and above can only invoke, Instruction No 2/2022-23 (GST investigation) issued for Sec. 70 summons etc.] These checks and balances cannot simply be bypassed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... way of issuing ASMT-10 which has a very narrow and restrictive scope of scrutiny of returns. Even under Income Tax there are precedence that a limited scrutiny assessment cannot be enlarged to full scrutiny by officer. Such by-passing would be nothing but harassment of taxpayers in my humble view. Reply By Padmanathan Kollengode: The Reply: I would like to add that it is a well-settled princi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ple that Taxmen cannot carryout any fishing/ roving enquiries. Reply By Amit Agrawal: The Reply: I most respectfully disagree with Shri Kasturi Sir, more specifically with the claim that 'Govt. is the ruler and we are being ruled over'. In my view, Govt. and its officers are serving public (including tax-payers) and they are definitely not rulers. And Govt. and its officers are bound to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... follow law & prescribed procedures and if they do not, public (including tax-payers) have right to ignore non-foundational notices such as subject notice under discussion here. At-least, I will ignore such notices ..... But, I also understand what Shri Kasturi Sir is advising is, what is referred as a 'practical approach'. And as said by him, it is tax-payer's right to opt for such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'practical approach' or defend himself judicially if need so arise. Ultimately, these are the decisions which concerned tax-payer needs to take. These are ex facie views of mine and the same should not be construed as professional advice / suggestion. And I respect contrary views. Reply By KASTURI SETHI: The Reply: A gulf between 'theory' & 'practice' will always remai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n.
Reply By KASTURI SETHI:
The Reply:
Sh.Padamanathan Kollegode Ji & Sh.Amit Agrawal Ji,
I have no objection with difference of opinion. Difference of opinion always leads to search and search leads to innovative ideas. This is a fact. So difference of opinion must be welcomed wholeheartedly. This is from the core of my heart. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
