New
February 23, 2023
By
Prerna

Mismatch in GSTR-1  -3B not Conclusive for Suppression of Tax

In recent years, the Indian government has taken various measures to curb tax evasion and increase tax compliance. The introduction of Goods and Services Tax (GST) was a significant step towards creating a unified tax system in the country. However, the implementation of GST has not been without its challenges. One of the issues that businesses face is the mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B.

GSTR-1 is a monthly or quarterly return that businesses file to provide details of their outward supplies of goods or services. GSTR-3B is a summary return that businesses file to provide details of their tax liability, input tax credit (ITC) claimed, and tax paid.

When there is a mismatch between these returns, it could indicate a suppression of tax. However, a recent ruling by the National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA) has clarified that a mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B is not conclusive evidence of tax suppression.

What is the NAA Ruling?

The NAA ruling came in response to a case where a business was accused of not passing on the benefits of a reduction in GST rates to its customers. The authorities had argued that the business had suppressed tax by not reporting the reduced rates in its GSTR-1 return. However, the business argued that it had reported the reduced rates in its GSTR-3B return, and the mismatch was due to a technical error.

The NAA accepted the business's argument and ruled that a mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B is not conclusive evidence of tax suppression. The authority noted that GST law allows businesses to rectify errors in their returns and claim ITC in subsequent returns. It also observed that a mismatch could occur due to technical glitches or differences in the reporting period of GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. Therefore, the NAA concluded that the authorities cannot assume tax suppression based solely on a mismatch between these returns.

Why is the Ruling Significant?

The NAA ruling is significant because it provides clarity on how authorities should interpret a mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. It acknowledges that such discrepancies can occur despite businesses' best efforts to comply with GST law. The ruling also emphasizes the importance of giving businesses an opportunity to rectify errors in their returns and claim ITC.

Furthermore, the ruling could have implications for businesses that are facing similar allegations of tax suppression based on a mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. They can use the ruling to defend their position and avoid penalties and legal action.

What Should Businesses do to Avoid Mismatch?

While the NAA ruling provides some relief to businesses, it is still essential to ensure that GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B are consistent. Here are some tips that businesses can follow to avoid a mismatch:

1. Ensure Timely Filing : Businesses should file GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B on time to avoid a mismatch. Late filing could result in penalties and legal action.

2. Reconcile Data : Businesses should reconcile the data in GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B to ensure that the figures match. They should identify and rectify any discrepancies promptly.

3. Use Technology : Businesses can use technology such as GST software to automate the process of filing returns, reconciling data, and detecting errors. This can reduce the risk of a mismatch and save time and resources.

Conclusion

The NAA ruling clarifies that a mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B is not conclusive evidence of tax suppression. While this is a significant relief for businesses, they should still ensure that these returns are consistent to avoid penalties and legal action. By following the tips mentioned above and leveraging technology, businesses can comply with GST law and avoid the risk of a mismatch.

Suggestions



The National Biopharma Mission
Definition of Business Exempt Supplies: Revised Model GST Law
TIME SWITCHES - GST RATES HSN CODE 9107

Related Blog Post