9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lone, earthquake, or any other calamity caused by nature otherwise affecting the implementation of any of the provision of the Act - A perusal of the discussion made in the GST Council in the 49th meeting held on 18.02.2023 which has been extracted hereinabove indicates that the Law Committee had considered the representation of various officers, the delay in the scrutiny and audit because of Covid-19 pandemic, the workload having been increased and that it not being capable that the proceedings be closed in terms of Subsection (10) of Section 173 by 30.09.2023, therefore, recommended an extension of a period of three months. The extension of the period of limitation in all proceedings before Courts and Tribunals is what was considered by the Hon ble Apex Court in the said decision and not matters pertaining to assessment, reassessment, show cause notice or the like issued by tax Authorities. Thus, the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in suo motu proceedings [ 2022 (1) TMI 385 - SC ORDER ] would also not be applicable to the present facts and circumstances. The notification No.9/2023 dated 31.03.2023 at Annexure-A cannot be found fault with on the basis of the submission made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication No.9/2023 is eschewed, no orders could be passed on the show cause notice issued under Subsection (1) of Section 73 by 30.09.2023 and the extension of time till 31.12.2023 for passing such orders is without any basis. 4. In this regard Dr.Podar, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, 4.1. In terms of decision of the Hon ble Apex court in Misc. Application No. 21/2022 in Misc. Application No.665/2021 in Suo moto writ petition No.(C)3/2020, the Hon ble Apex court vide its order dated 10.01.2022 at para 5 of the said order has held that the period from 15.03.2021 till 28.02.2022 would stand excluded for the purpose of calculation of limitation and the balance period of limitation as available on 3.10.2021 would be available with effect from 1.03.2022. 4.2. In the present case, the limitation having expired on 30.09.2023, the extension of time granted by the Hon ble Apex Court would not be available to the Authorities and as such, the reliance placed by the Authorities on COVID pandemic would not be applicable. 4.3. Secondly, he relies upon the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Mohit Minerals Private Limited Civil Appeal No.1390/2022 other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at is to be taxed for these purposes. The specification of the recipient in this case the importer by Notification 10/2017 is only clarificatory. The Government by notification did not specify a taxable person different from the recipient prescribed in Section 5(3) of the IGST Act for the purposes of reverse charge; (iv) Section 5(4) of the IGST Act enables the Central Government to specify a class of registered persons as the recipients, thereby conferring the power of creating a deeming fiction on the delegated legislation; (v) The impugned levy imposed on the service aspect of the transaction is in violation of the principle of composite supply enshrined under Section 2(30) read with Section 8 of the CGST Act. Since the Indian importer is liable to pay IGST on the composite supply , comprising of supply of goods and supply of services of transportation, insurance, etc. in a CIF contract, a separate levy on the Indian importer for the supply of services by the shipping line would be in violation of Section 8 of the CGST Act. 4.4. By relying on the above paragraph, he submits that the recommendation of the GST Council is not binding on the Union. The Union of India could either ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2017-18, the date of passing order has already been extended till September 2023. It has been proposed to extend it further from September 2023 to December 2023. He mentioned that while the request of some of the tax administrations was to extend the time limit for a longer period, however, keeping the taxpayers interest in mind, the Law Committee has recommended an extension of only three months for these financial years. Since all the states have agreed, the said time limits could be extended. 5.7.2 Hon ble Member from Bihar stated that while proposal could be considered, however, it should be decided that such an extension in timelines for these financial years under sub-section (10) of section 73 of CGST Act is being made for the last time. 4.6. On the basis of all the above submissions, he submits that the extension of time of three months made vide notification No.9/2023 dated 31.03.2023 at Annexure-A to the petition is without any basis. The same is required to be quashed and consequently the notice issued under Subsection (1) of Section 73 not capable of being complied by passing necessary orders under Subsection (10) of Section 73 by 30.09.2023, the proceedings initiated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ementation of any of the provisions of this Act. 9. The explanation to Section 168A indicates as regards the time limit which has been fixed that notwithstanding anything contained in the Act, the Government may, on the recommendation of Council by notification, extend the time limit specified in or prescribed or notified under the Act. The explanation to the said Section indicates that the expression force majeure would include case of war, epidemic, flood, drought, fire, cyclone, earthquake, or any other calamity caused by nature otherwise affecting the implementation of any of the provision of the Act. 10. A perusal of the discussion made in the GST Council in the 49th meeting held on 18.02.2023 which has been extracted hereinabove indicates that the Law Committee had considered the representation of various officers, the delay in the scrutiny and audit because of Covid-19 pandemic, the workload having been increased and that it not being capable that the proceedings be closed in terms of Subsection (10) of Section 173 by 30.09.2023, therefore, recommended an extension of a period of three months. 11. This extension has been made after taking into account dissenting opinion by c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
