New
Published on:
February 23, 2023
By
Prerna

Demand & Recovery under GST: Section 73 & 74

In this article, we explore the notion of Demand and Recovery as it pertains to Goods and Services Tax or GST as well as the applicable forms and stipulations under Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act. The GST, introduced as an indirect tax imposed on the provision of goods and services in India, has supplanted the diverse indirect taxes previously levied independently by central and state governments; thereby forging a comprehensive taxation system. Demand and Recovery under GST refers to pursuing outstanding tax obligations from businesses and people who have failed to settle their GST liabilities by the due date. Let us deeply consider the idea of Demand and Recovery per GST in all its intricacies. 

What is Demand and Recovery under GST?

Demanding recovery under the Goods and Services Tax entailed procuring overdue fiscal responsibilities from corporate persons and private citizens who had shirked settling their GST liabilities within the allotted timeframe. Should a business entity or person refuse to pay the requisite GST amount before the established deadline, the GST department would issue a demand notice containing intricate particulars of the outstanding tax debts, accruing interest charges, applicable penalties, and the terminal date to render settlement. Where remuneration remained unsatisfied inside the circumscribed period, the GST department would initiate the recoupment practice, frequently resorting to stricter evaluating tactics or, in rare cases of protracted evasion, more punitive material confiscations to compensate for eliminated obligations.

The recovery process involves the seizure of assets of the defaulter, including bank accounts, properties, and other assets. The GST department can also initiate legal proceedings against the defaulter to recover the outstanding tax dues.

Forms Required for Demand and Recovery under the Goods and Services Tax

To initiate the process of demand and recovery under the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the GST department employs several forms to carry out the various steps. GST DRC-01, otherwise known as the Demand Notice, is utilized to formally inform taxpayers of any shortfalls that must be addressed. 

Should repayment be necessary, GST DRC-02 or the Recovery Certificate declares the outstanding balance and authorizes collection. For more complex cases where an infraction is suspected but not yet proven, GST DRC-03 serves as a Show Cause Notice requesting rebuttal from the taxpayer. Form GST DRC-04 allows the targeted party to submit a Reply to the Show Cause Notice, defending their stance before an official ruling.

If goods are confiscated as part of the process, several additional forms are involved. GST DRC-05 orders the release of any property seized pending the resolution of associated proceedings. Under certain circumstances requiring urgency, GST DRC-06 may be issued to provisionally release holdings while payment or other arrangements are finalized. 

Taxpayers seeking an alternative settlement have the option to apply for Deferred Payment or Payment in installments using GST DRC-07. Once dues are paid or tax credits are applied, GST DRC-08 acknowledges this with a Certificate of Payment or Adjustment. Should errors be identified, GST DRC-09 enables the filing of an Application for Rectification of Mistake. 

Finally, GST DRC-10 announces forthcoming Auctions of Seized Goods, such as when confiscation leads to surplus assets requiring liquidation.

Section 73 – Determination of Tax not Paid or Short Paid or Erroneously Refunded or Input Tax Credit wrongly availed or utilized for any reason other than fraud or any willful misstatement or suppression of facts

Undoubtedly, Section 73 addresses crucial matters about uncollected revenues under GST. Namely, it delineates protocols for quantifying tax amounts remaining unpaid, partly settled, or incorrectly reimbursed to taxpayers. Equally significant, the provision specifies how input credits mistakenly availed or misapplied must be rectified.

Notably, the section is not invoked in situations entailing fraudulent deceit or intentional provision of false particulars. Rather, its scope is limited to addressing good-faith errors or unintentional omissions leading to tax deficiencies. Through a judicious appraisal of records and transactions, the designated authority endeavors to accurately compute outstanding dues after factoring in all exemptions, concessions, and credits legitimately applicable to taxpayers' operations and dealings.

In essence, Section 73 serves to reconcile tax accounts in a manner that is both equitable and transparent, barring circumstances involving malicious intent or willful distortion of material information. A reasonable, non-adversarial approach is adopted to establish true tax liabilities unfulfilled due to inadvertent lapses rather than malafide conduct.

Under this section, the officer responsible for collecting taxes can deliver notification to the noncompliant taxpayer, requesting settlement of the outstanding dues alongside accumulated interest and fines. Should the indebted individual furnish payment within one month from the date of notice, further actions will not be pursued by the taxation body. However, if no remittance is rendered and time elapses, sanctioned recovery efforts will be set forth.

On the other hand, if the notified party contests the demanded amount, a rebuttal may be submitted to the show cause notice issued by the tax department. Subsequently, the proper officer can issue an updated order, either corroborating or modifying the demanded sum subject to the objections raised in the counter statement put forth by the contesting litigant.

Section 74 outlines how authorities determine instances of unpaid, underpaid, erroneously refunded, or incorrectly claimed input tax credits stemming from unintentional errors rather than deception. 

This portion of the act addresses scenarios where liability remains unfulfilled not because of intentional falsehoods or omissions, but due to good-faith mistakes in filing. Tax authorities are tasked with accurately distinguishing cases where taxpayers failed to fully satisfy obligations through no fault of their own from those involving fraudulent representations or willful nondisclosure meant to mislead. While consistency demands uniform treatment, compassion requires recognizing the difference between lapses born of fallibility and acts fueled by malice aforethought.

While empowered by statute, officials wield their authority judiciously. Notices prompt timely compliance, though harsher actions may prove necessary should dialogue fail. Disputes deserve consideration, and careful review often finds a middle ground. No party wishes confrontation where understanding could suffice. Within the limits of law and fact, each seeks fair treatment - an open and impartial hearing respects all.

Conclusion

While fulfilling Goods and Services Tax obligations remains crucial, unforeseen circumstances may impede prompt remittance at times. Stringent follow-up on unpaid duties risks undermining goodwill and productivity. For some, complex returns or transition troubles stall settlement, though penalties serve few. As responsible members of the economic community, we aim to cooperate freely within reasonable bounds, and authorities to evaluate cases carefully before harsh actions. Together may we build an environment conducive to cooperation and growth, with care for all.

Suggestions

Relays Surge Suppressors HSN Code- 8536

GST on Renting of Immovable Property GST 

Interest Rate – 18% vs 24%

Updated on:
March 16, 2024