|
|
|
Newsletter no. 84 dated 21.05.2023
|
|
|
|
|
|
This website contains information about recent changes mainly in GST laws. It also contains Articles on various topic in GST. Please visit the website and read more.
|
|
|
|
Index of the Newsletter
- Recent updates
- GST in Media
- Income Tax in Media
- Article
- Press Release
- Lawgics by CA Nidhi Agarwal
- GST notes by CMA Anil Sharma
- Book by CMA Anil Sharma
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSTN Advisory no. 672 dated 19.09.2026
|
This is an advance information to the all users – Taxpayers and Tax Officers, of GST System who use Digital Certificate Signature on the GST Portal.
|
A new version of emSigner (v3.3) is being made available for download for the purpose of providing compatibility with tokens (USB dongles) that are issued on or after 21-September-2026.
|
A. Users with valid certificates: There is no change for the users having existing valid digital certificates and their existing token (USB Dongle) are working, as of 21-Sep-2026. If your existing DSC works normally, you may continue using your current emSigner version.
|
If you encounter signing failures or if your certificate does not appear for selection despite correctly installed token drivers, upgrade to the emSigner version 3.3 by following steps given under point-B below. The emSigner version 3.3 is backward compatible to support the existing tokens (USB dongles).
|
B. Users with newly issued tokens: The users who have been issued a new token (USB Dongle) on or after 21-Sep-2026, either due to issuance of new certificate and dongle, or renewal of certificate in a new dongle, shall have to upgrade to version 3.3 of emSigner by following below steps:
|
Step-1. Please ensure that your system – desktop / laptop / AIO which on which the DSC is used for the GST System, meets the following minimum system requirements:
|
1.1 Operating system and hardware
|
Step-2.Download & install the version 3.3 of emSigner from the GST Portal by navigating to https://www.gst.gov.in/help/docsigner - the older versions of emSigner will not work for such new DSC dongles issued from 21 September 2026 onwards.
|
C. Validity and future renewal: Under CCA’s advisory, DSCs downloaded onto FIPS 140-2 dongles on or before 21 September 2026 can continue to be used until the DSC expires. That date does not automatically invalidate existing DSCs. Subsequent renewal or fresh issuance generally requires a FIPS 140-3 dongle, subject to CCA’s specified exceptions. The CCA migration advisory may be referred for more details on this aspect by navigating to https://cca.gov.in/sites/files/pdf/news/Advisory_on_Migration_from_FIPS_140- 2_to_FIPS_140-3.pdf
|
Please create a ticket on the GST Helpdesk if you need any assistance while upgrading to the emSigner version 3.3 and our teams shall get in touch for resolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSTN is taking downtime to enhance its services on the GST Portal on 18.09.2026 from 12:00 AM onwards until 2:00 am of 18.09.2026.
|
|
We shall be enhancing services on the GST portal on : 18th Sept’26 12:00 AM onwards. GST Portal services will not be available until 18th Sept’26 02:00 AM. The inconvenience caused is regretted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSTN is taking downtime to enhance its services on the GST Portal on 17.09.2026 from 03:00 AM onwards until 4:30 am of 17.09.2026.
|
|
We shall be enhancing services on the GST portal on : 17th Sept’26 03:00 AM onwards. GST Portal services will not be available until 17th Sept’26 04:30 AM. The inconvenience caused is regretted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSTN is taking downtime to enhance its services on the GST Portal on 16.09.2026 from 12:00 AM onwards until 2:00 am of 16.09.2026.
|
|
We shall be enhancing services on the GST portal on : 16th Sept’26 12:00 AM onwards. GST Portal services will not be available until 16th Sept’26 02:00 AM. The inconvenience caused is regretted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSTN is taking downtime to enhance its services on the GST Portal on 12.09.2026 from 01:30 AM onwards until 3:30 am of 12.09.2026.
|
|
We shall be enhancing services on the GST portal on : 12th Sept’26 1:30 AM onwards. GST Portal services will not be available until 12th Sept’26 03:30 AM. The inconvenience caused is regretted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSTN Advisory no. 671 dated 07.09.2026
|
In cases where a dispute regarding liability exists but the demand amount is reflected as "NIL" or "Zero" in the demand order, and payment has been made by the taxpayer prior to the issuance of the demand order, the previous validation restricting the filing of an appeal against such demand orders has been removed from the GST Portal. Accordingly, taxpayers are now enabled to file an appeal in Form GST APL-01 against demand orders reflecting a NIL or Zero demand amount.
|
Taxpayers facing the above issue may now file an appeal in Form GST APL-01 against such demand orders.
|
In case of any query or difficulty while filing the appeal, taxpayers may raise a ticket with the GST Helpdesk for assistance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Preventive Wing of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Commissionerate, Shimla, has uncovered an alleged GST fraud involving input tax credit of around ₹5.55 crore in the Kala Amb industrial area of Sirmaur district. The investigation has also led to the arrest of Gaurav Jain, managing director of M/s Samay Pharma India Private Limited, Trilokpur.
|
How Was the Alleged GST Fraud Carried Out?
CGST officials alleged that Samay Pharma and M/s Dual Healthcare claimed input tax credit using fake invoices issued by several firms that either did not exist or were found to be non-genuine.
|
The investigation found that ITC worth around ₹5.55 crore was allegedly claimed through invoices linked to 10 such firms. Officials examined the transactions to determine whether the supplies mentioned in these invoices had actually taken place.
|
What Did Officials Find About the Goods?
Officials said the invoices showed the purchase of goods, but there was no evidence confirming that those goods were actually transported.
|
E-way bills and toll-plaza records also did not support the movement of goods mentioned in the invoices, raising questions about whether the transactions reflected genuine supplies.
|
How Were GST Refund Claims Allegedly Involved?
Officials further alleged that the fake input tax credit was later included in GST refund claims.
|
The suspected credit was allegedly used in an attempt to obtain money back from the government through the GST refund mechanism.
|
What Other Irregularities Were Found?
During the investigation, officials found several suspicious transactions, fake firms and invoices without actual movement of goods.
|
They also alleged that shell entities were being used to manipulate the GST credit and refund system.
|
What Evidence Did Investigators Examine?
The CGST team recorded statements from several people during the investigation and examined digital evidence.
|
The inquiry also looked at invoices, the firms connected to them and records relating to the alleged movement of goods.
|
Why Was the Managing Director Arrested?
Based on the evidence collected during the investigation, Gaurav Jain, managing director of M/s Samay Pharma India Private Limited, was arrested.
|
The arrest was made under Section 69(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
|
Follow for daily updates on cybercrime, corporate fraud, DFIR, hacking, investigations, and digital forensics
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GST officers have arrested a partner of a firm engaged in trading of iron and steel goods for fraudulently availing input tax credit of over Rs 15.78 crore.
|
Investigations by the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST), Delhi South Commissionerate's anti-evasion branch revealed that the firm had availed inadmissible ITC on the basis of invoices issued by multiple firms, several of which were found to be non-existent, non-functional, suspended or cancelled.
|
Field verification also established that certain suppliers had no genuine business activity at their declared places of business.
|
In a statement, the Finance Ministry said, "CGST Delhi South Commissionerate have arrested a partner of the firm engaged in trading of iron and steel goods in a case involving fraudulent availment, utilisation and passing on of inadmissible ITC aggregating to over Rs 15.78 crore through bogus invoices of approximately Rs 87.67 crore."
|
Further inquiry established that ITC was availed without actual receipt of goods and was also passed on to various recipients through invoices issued without corresponding supply of goods.
|
Based on the evidence gathered during the investigation and statements recorded under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017, the accused was arrested on September 14 and produced before the Patiala House Court, which remanded him to judicial custody for 14 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Superintendent of Central GST, Mohit Pratap Singh, was caught while allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs 8 lakh through a mediator, the Lokayukta said.
|
Lokayukta sleuths trapped the Central government officer while he was allegedly accepting the bribe at Kendriya Sadan in Koramangala here, according to a statement.
|
According to the Lokayukta, Singh had demanded the money to "close a false complaint" filed against the complainant, Syed Zameer, in connection with pending Central GST dues. PTI GMS SSK
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Punjab’s excise and taxation officials detained 170 vehicles carrying goods suspected to be in violation of GST provisions, officials said on Monday.
|
The operation, carried out jointly by all State Investigation and Preventive Units with special focus on Mandi Gobindgarh and Khanna, led to the seizure of iron scrap and finished iron/steel goods valued at more than Rs 5 crore.
|
Excise and Taxation Minister Harpal Singh Cheema described the drive as “a wake-up call for those who think they can get away with it.” He emphasised that the government is determined to plug every loophole and ensure that tax compliance becomes the rule of the day rather than the exception.
|
A substantial number of vehicles were found without proper invoices and prescribed documents, a clear violation of the GST law.
|
Punjab will not allow tax evasion to eat into the state’s revenue. Every legitimate rupee must reach the public exchequer, for it is the lifeblood of development, Cheema said in a statement.
|
The minister further informed that the detained consignments are undergoing detailed verification, which is expected to be completed within a week. PTI CHS MPL MPL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Telangana Commercial Taxes Department has issued detailed guidelines governing the use of Artificial Intelligence tools and other third party online platforms by its officers, making individual officers personally accountable for any unauthorised sharing of taxpayer information through such platforms.
|
Circular No. 1/2026, issued by the department, allows officers to use AI for generic research, drafting and administrative efficiency, but makes it clear that such use cannot come at the cost of taxpayer confidentiality, data security or the independent application of mind by officers.
|
The circular prohibits officers and staff from typing, pasting, uploading, scanning, photographing, dictating, transcribing or otherwise transmitting taxpayer related information into any public or commercial AT tool, chatbot, generative AI platform, document analyster, summariser translation or transcription service, or cloud based analytical software, unless the platform has been expressly authorised in writing by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes or the Government of Telangana.
|
CA Jitendra Patel, Partner, Indirect Tax, N.A.Shah Associates LLP, said the circular was a significant and welcome step towards the responsible use of AI by tax officers.
|
"The Telangana commercial taxes department's circular No. 1/2026 is a significant and welcome step towards the responsible use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) by tax officers. While the circular encourages the use of AI for research, drafting and administrative efficiency, it rightly emphasises that taxpayers' confidentiality and the independent application of mind by officers cannot be compromised and liable to penal action," Patel said.
|
Officers face personal accountability
The restrictions cover a wide range of taxpayer information, including GSTIN, PAN, legal name or trade name, address and contact particulars, bank account details, returns and annexures, financial statements, invoices, e way bill data, discrepancy reports, notices, assessment, adjudication or appellate orders, audit material, refund applications, inspection , search and investigation records, statements recorded during proceedings, and internal notes or legal opinions relating to an identifable taxpayer.
|
The circular also makes clear that the responsibility for protecting such information rests with the officer concerned. Unauthorised transmission of taxpayer information to an external AI platform can therefore expose the officer to disciplinary, legal and data protection consequences.
|
Ikesh Nagpal, Lead, Indirect Tax, AKM Global, said the circular strikes a balance between the use and AI and the need to protect taxpayer confidentialy.
|
"The Telangana Commercial Taxes Department's circular strikes a pragmatic balance between embracing AI and safeguarding taxpayer confidentiality. Rather than prohibiting AI, it permits its responsible use while drawing a firm boundary against sharing identifiable taxpayer information on unauthorised platforms. This is particularly relevant for tax administration, where officers routinely handle highly sensitive financial and transactional data," Nagpal said.
|
"More importantly, the circular reinforces that AI may assist but cannot replace the officers' independent application of mind. Every AI generated legal proposition or case citation must be independently verified, and the final order must reflect the officer's own reasoning. This approach places accountability where it belongs with the decision make while still allowing technology to improve efficiency in tax administration," he added.
|
AI cannot replace tax officer's judgment
The department has also stressed that AI cannot replace the independent judgment required from officers, particularly while issuing notices, assessments, adjudication orders and other quasi judicial decisions.
|
Manoj Mishra, Partner and Tax controversy Management leader, Grand Thornton Bharat, said the circular comes at a time when AI is becoming increasingly embedded in legal and tax workflows.
|
"As AI becomes increasingly embedded in legal and tax workflows, the focus has rightly shifted from whether AI should be used to ensuring it is used responsibly and within the boundaries of law. Recent judicial interventions, where courts have cautioned against mechanical reliance on AI generated content and even set aside orders lacking independent application of mind, underscore that technology cannot substitute statutory decision making. Recent Telangana's Circular on AI use is therefore a timely and pragmatic intervention. It reinforces that taxpayers information remains confidential under the GST framework and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, and that unauthorised disclosure on public AI platforms can trigger disciplinary, legal and data protection consequences. By permitting AI for generic research and drafting while mandating human verification, confidentiality safeguards and independent judgment, the circular offers and balanced governance framework that could serve as a useful precedent for tax administrations across the country , "Mishra said.
|
"The circular makes one point unmistakably clear: custodianship of taxpayer data carries personal accountability. Any unauthorised disclosure through public AI platforms may expose the officer to disciplinary action, criminal and data protection consequences, while also jeopardising the validity of the underlying tax proceedings. AI may improve administrative efficiency, but responsibility for data security, legal accuracy and independent decision making cannot be delegated to an algorithm," he added.
|
Public AI platforms treated as third party transmission
Aravind Srivatsan, Partner and India Tax Leader, Nangia Global, described the framework as what could be termed a first of its kind detailed code governing the use of AI tools by tax department staff.
|
He said the Telangana Government has acknowledged that officers are increasingly using AI based tools to improve the speed, consistency and quality of their work, while making it clear that such use cannot compromise taxpayer confidentiality, data security of the officer's independent judgment.
|
Srivatsan pointed out that large language models, generative AI platforms, chatbots, document analysers, summarisers, translators, transcription services and coding assistants may process information on private servers, frequently outside India. Information entered into such platforms may also be logged, retained , reviewed or used for model training, he said.
|
According to Srivatsan , typing , pasting, uploading, scanning, photographing or dictating departmental material into an external AI platform amounts to electronic transmission of information to a third party and can create risks of data leakage, misuse and subsequent litigation.
|
He said that where an officer transmits taxpayer particulars to an external AI engine without authority of law or taxpayer consent, the act can attract personal accountability.
|
Disciplinary, criminal and data protection consequences
The circular provides for consequences where taxpayer information is disclosed without authorisation. These can include disciplinary action under the applicable Telangana Civil Services rules, possible criminal consequences under applicable law and data protection consequences under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
|
The circular also addresses the potential impact on tax proceedings where AI generated material is used without proper verification. An officer remains responsible for the accuracy of statutory provisions, legal propositions and judicial precedents relied upon in an official proceeding.
|
Aditya Singhania, Founder of Trackase, said the guidelines could address the unauthorised and unconscious sharing of taxpayer data through general AI applications while also establishing individual responsibility for breaches.
|
He said the framework draws a clear distinction between the role of humans and machines in proceedings where tax officers exercise quasi judicial authority. He also pointed to instances where courts have taken cognisance of non existent. AI generated citations and said the Telangana framework provides detailed guidance for responsible use of AI by tax officials.
|
Officers told to delete past taxpayer data
The department has also addressed information that may already have been entered into AI platforms.
|
Officers and staff have been directed, to the extent technically feasible, to delete taxpayer related information previously entered into AI platforms, along with associated chat histories and stored files.
|
The restrictions also extend to the use of personal mobile phones, tablets, laptops, personal email accounts and personal cloud storage for processing departmental material through AI tools.
|
At the same time, the circular does not prohibit AI use altogether. Officers can use AI for generic research, drafting assistance and language related tasks, provided identifiable taxpayer information is not shared and AI generated material is independently verified before being relied upon.
|
The framework effectively places a clear boundary around the use of AI in tax administration. AI can be used as an efficiency tool, but the responsibility for taxpayer confidentiality, data security, legal accuracy and independent decision making remains with the tax officer.
|
Source: cfo economictimes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The tax department is increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI), data analytics and information from multiple government databases to identify anomalies, detect potential tax risks and sharpen scrutiny of taxpayers.
|
According to tax officials and chartered accountants TNIE spoke to, the approach is moving beyond checking individual tax returns to analysing patterns across Income Tax Returns, GST returns, e-invoices, e-way bills, registrations and historical taxpayer behaviour. The objective is to make scrutiny more targeted and improve voluntary compliance.
|
The Income-Tax department already processes information available through systems such as the Annual Information Statement (AIS), which gives taxpayers details of financial transactions and income-related information available with the tax authorities. More sophisticated AI tools could help identify patterns across these datasets and flag cases requiring closer examination.
|
Jigar Doshi, country head - Indirect Tax, Ascentium India, said the department's scrutiny and audit process was no longer limited to information submitted in a particular return.
|
“Increasingly, the department is able to run data-driven simulations across multiple sources — including Income Tax Returns, GST returns, e-invoices, e-way bills, registrations and historical taxpayer behaviour — to identify anomalies and potential tax risks,” he said.
|
GST audits go deeper
GST administration is also making greater use of centralised analytics to identify suspicious transactions and taxpayers. Platforms such as DGRAM are used to flag fake registrations, suspicious input tax credit (ITC) chains and potential tax-evasion patterns, while BIFA (Business Intelligence and Fraud Analytics) acts as a risk and exception-reporting engine using the all-India GST database.
|
At the state level, tax administrations are also developing their own analytical capabilities. Maharashtra's Business Intelligence & Data Warehouse (BIDW), for instance, combines a data warehouse with an analytics layer to help identify cases for scrutiny and audit.
|
“Manual audits and sample testing alone may not be sufficient against AI-enabled regulatory scrutiny,” says Rajat Mohan, managing partner at AMRG Associates, adding that businesses are facing greater scrutiny of historical transaction data and cross-period discrepancies.
|
GST audits can involve reconciliation across GSTR-1, GSTR-3B, GSTR-2B, e-way bills and e-invoices. Automated systems can identify differences in ITC, outward supplies and turnover, as well as claims involving suppliers whose registrations were subsequently cancelled or who failed to discharge their tax liabilities.
|
The scale of information available to tax authorities is significant. India had more than 1.65 crore GST taxpayers as of May 2026, generating millions of invoices and returns that can be analysed alongside income-tax information.
|
This allows authorities to identify issues such as unusual refund claims, short payment of GST, excessive ITC claims and inconsistencies between sales and purchases.
|
The growing ability to combine information from GST, income tax, customs and other government systems could allow tax authorities to build a wider financial profile of taxpayers.
|
According to experts, this means for businesses conventional reconciliation of books with tax returns may no longer be sufficient. Companies may increasingly need to identify potential risks before they are flagged by the department.
|
AI could also allow the department to alert taxpayers to potential discrepancies, seek clarification digitally and escalate cases for formal scrutiny where required.
|
However, AI is likely to remain an aid rather than a substitute for human judgment. Officers would still have to verify facts and take responsibility for assessment decisions.
|
“AI is an enabler,” one tax official said, stressing that the taxpayer or professional taking the final tax position would continue to be accountable. AI cannot be treated as a substitute for human judgment, particularly in complex tax matters.
|
Source: The New Indian Express
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has arrested Superintendent, Land and Building Section at office of Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Raigad and a CGST consultant, in a bribery case.
|
The CBI registered the instant case on 09.09.2026 against the accused Superintendent and unknown others based on a complaint by the Project Head of a private realty company at New Panvel. The realty company had undertaken a redevelopment project of two Buildings at Sector 17, New Panvel. A total of 24 of these flats are owned by the CGST & Central Excise, Raigad Commissionerate for which the necessary approvals from the local authority have already been received. It was alleged in the complaint that the accused Superintendent demanded Rs. 1 Crore for the NOC and handing over of the flats for redevelopment. During the verification of the complaint, the accused officer demanded Rs. 10 Lakh in cash on 10.09.2026, Rs. 20 Lakh as downpayment of a flat purchased by the accused public servant and Rs. 70 Lakh on later stage for other officers of DG HRD CGST, New Delhi.
|
The CBI laid a trap on 10.09.2026 while the accused Superintendent directed the complainant to handover Rs. 10 Lakh undue advantage to a CGST consultant, who was present there. Both the accused persons have been arrested on 10.09.2026 and were produced before the competent court on 11.09.2026 which has granted two days of police custody of both the accused persons.
|
Further investigation is being undertaken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amid the growing use of artificial intelligence in tax administration, the state commercial taxes department has imposed strict safeguards on the use of AI tools by its officials, making them personally accountable for any unauthorised disclosure of taxpayer information through such platforms.
In circular No. 1/2026, the department allowed the use of AI for generic research, drafting and administrative tasks, but underscored that taxpayer confidentiality, data security and independent decision-making by officers cannot be compromised for convenience.
|
The guidelines prohibit officers and staff from typing, pasting, uploading, scanning, photographing, dictating, transcribing or otherwise transmitting taxpayer-related information to any public or commercial AI tool, chatbot, generative AI platform, document analyser, summariser, translation or transcription service, or cloud-based analytical software.
|
Such platforms may be used for taxpayer-related information only if they have been expressly authorised in writing by the commissioner of commercial taxes or the Telangana govt.
|
The move comes at a time when the department is increasingly deploying AI-driven systems for taxpayer monitoring, risk assessment, and scrutiny. While AI is being leveraged to detect anomalies and improve tax administration, the circular seeks to ensure that sensitive taxpayer data does not flow into unauthorised external platforms during the process.
|
The department has also cautioned officials against relying on AI-generated outputs as a substitute for their own judgement.
|
Officials remain responsible for independently examining facts, interpreting the relevant tax laws and arriving at decisions based on their own assessment.
|
The circular makes it clear that responsibility for compliance rests with individual officers. It warns that any unauthorised sharing, disclosure or transmission of taxpayer information through AI tools or other third party platforms could attract penal action, reinforcing accountability as the department expands the use of technology in tax administration.
|
Source: The Times of India
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Preventive Wing of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Commissionerate, Shimla, has unearthed an Rs 6.55-crore fraud involving fake invoices and fraudulent claims of input tax credit (ITC) and GST refunds in the Kala Amb industrial area of Sirmaur district and arrested the managing director (MD) of a pharma company. The accused has been identified as Gaurav Jain, MD of M/s Samay Pharma India Private Limited, Trilokpur, Sirmaur. According to officials, the investigation revealed that Samay Pharma and M/s Dual Healthcare had allegedly availed ITC on the basis of invoices issued by several fake and non-existent supplier firms.
|
It was found that ITC amounting to Rs 5.55 crore had allegedly been claimed through invoices linked to 10 non-existent firms. The officials also found that the invoices showed supplies for which the actual movement of goods could not be verified through e-way bills and toll-plaza data.
|
The alleged fraudulent ITC was subsequently included in the GST refund claims, with an attempt reportedly made to obtain cash refunds from the government exchequer.
|
The investigating officials found the alleged use of fake firms, invoices without actual movement of goods, suspicious accounting entries and shell entities to manipulate the GST input-credit and refund mechanism.
|
The officials recorded the statements of various people and examined digital evidence, based on which Jain was arrested under Section 69(1) of the Central GST Act, 2017.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) has held that electricity charges recovered by a commercial building maintenance company from occupants at actual cost, without any markup or profit, will not attract Goods and Services Tax (GST).
|
The ruling was pronounced on September 1 in the case of DH Maintenance Ltd, which provides common-area maintenance and facility management services for a commercial building in Kolkata.
|
DH Maintenance pays electricity charges to distribution company CESC Ltd for electricity consumed in the building and recovers the cost from the occupants. The company sought clarity on whether such recovery could be treated as reimbursement in the capacity of a “pure agent” and excluded from the value of its maintenance services for GST purposes.
|
A pure agent under GST is a person who incurs costs or expenses on behalf of a client while providing a main service, and later claims reimbursement for the exact amount spent without adding any markup.
|
Under the proposed billing arrangement, electricity used in individual offices for normal consumption and heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) would be charged according to sub-meter readings. The electricity cost for common areas would be distributed among the occupants based on the super-built-up area of their respective units. The company would recover the electricity cost without adding any profit or markup.
|
The issue was significant because electricity supplied along with maintenance services would ordinarily form part of a composite supply. In such a case, the GST rate applicable to the principal maintenance service would apply to the electricity component as well.
|
However, the AAR relied on Circular No. 206/18/2023-GST dated October 31, 2023. The circular provides that where electricity is supplied along with renting of immovable property or maintenance services, it generally forms part of a composite supply. But where electricity is recovered on an actual basis — at the same amount charged by the electricity distribution company — the supplier is deemed to be acting as a pure agent for the electricity supply.
|
Interestingly, the AAR observed that DH Maintenance did not strictly satisfy the normal pure-agent test. It noted that electricity was an integral part of the maintenance and management services provided by the company.
|
The authority, however, said the specific deeming provision in the 2023 circular would apply. Since DH Maintenance proposed to charge occupants the same amount as charged by CESC, without any markup or profit, the electricity recovery would be treated as pure-agent recovery.
|
The AAR also extended this treatment to electricity used in common areas. The balance amount of the CESC bill, after accounting for electricity consumed in individual offices and HVAC, would be apportioned among occupants according to their respective areas.
|
“This ruling reinstates the position under the Circular on the taxability of electricity charges recovered on a metered basis, i.e. HVAC and non-HVAC, and aligns with the position adopted by most industry players. A key aspect, however, is the ruling’s finding that electricity charges relating to common area are also non-taxable as recovered in the capacity of pure agent,” said Harpreet Singh, partner, Indirect Tax, Deloitte.
|
“While this is a welcome position, it remains contentious and is likely to be challenged by the tax authorities before the Appellate Authority,” he added.
|
For January 2026, the CESC bill was Rs 20.19 lakh for 196,520 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of consumption. Of this, Rs 10.24 lakh related to non-HVAC consumption in individual offices, Rs 6.35 lakh to HVAC consumption and Rs 3.61 lakh to common-area consumption.
|
The Revenue had pointed out that similar issues had arisen in earlier adjudication proceedings for 2018-19 and 2019-20. The AAR, however, distinguished those proceedings, saying they related to the company’s existing billing pattern, whereas the present ruling concerned the proposed billing pattern.
|
The AAR ultimately ruled that electricity charges recovered at actual cost, including charges relating to HVAC and common-area consumption, would be excluded from the value of the company’s supply and would not attract GST under the proposed arrangement.
|
Source: Business Standard
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Haryana State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (SV&ACB) on Thursday arrested a State GST excise and taxation officer (ETO) and a chartered accountant from Jind as they were caught accepting a cash bribe in connection with a pending tax notice.
|
The accused have been identified as ETO Divesh Sahu of the SGST department and CA Ajay Sharma. According to the vigilance bureau they were taken into custody following a trap laid by the bureau’s Jind unit.
|
Officials said Sahu had allegedly demanded ₹5 lakh from the proprietor of a private company of Jind to refrain from taking strict action on a notice issued under Section 74 of the SGST and CGST Act, 2017. The notice related to alleged tax evasion of ₹75 lakh.
|
According to the complaint Sahu used Sharma as an intermediary to collect the money. The first instalment of ₹3 lakh was to be paid on Thursday, with the balance to follow later. The complainant approached the Anti-Corruption Bureau office in Jind. After verifying the allegation, a vigilance team laid a trap and caught Sharma accepting the bribe at his office on Bhiwani Road. The entire amount of ₹3 lakh was recovered from him.
|
An FIR has been registered at Police Station SV&ACB, Karnal, under Sections 7 and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Both accused are being questioned and further investigation is underway, the bureau said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HDFC Life Insurance Company Ltd on Friday (September 11) said that the Commissioner (Appeals-III), CGST & Central Excise, Mumbai, has confirmed the total Goods and Services Tax (GST) demand, including interest and penalty, in a case involving the period from July 1, 2017 to March 31, 2022.
|
"This is with reference to the intimation dated February 06, 2025, disclosing the details of the GST Order (Period involved - July 1, 2017 to March 31, 2022, Tax Demand – ₹942.18 crore, Interest as applicable and Penalty – ₹2,422.97 crore) received from the Additional Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Palghar Commissionerate, Maharashtra on February 05, 2025," HDFC Life Insurance Company said in a regulatory filing.
|
The original order, received in February 2025, involved a tax demand of ₹942.18 crore and a penalty of ₹2,422.97 crore, along with applicable interest.
|
HDFC Life said it received the appeal order on September 10, 2026. The order confirms the total tax demand, including interest and penalty, as mentioned in the original GST order issued by the Additional Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Palghar Commissionerate, Maharashtra.
|
The company said the order will have no adverse material impact on its financial operations. HDFC Life will further contest the matter by filing an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Taxes Department Chief Commissioner Babu A has said that the State is leveraging GST and related commercial tax data to develop a real-time mechanism for assessing economic activity and estimating Gross Value Added (GVA) across key sectors.
|
Addressing the 8th Collectors’ Conference at the Secretariat on Thursday, Babu said the GST-based assessment of manufacturing activity was showing a 19.6 per cent year-on-year growth up to July, compared with the approximately 18 per cent growth recorded up to the first quarter. The estimated manufacturing GVA stood at around Rs 1.75 lakh crore. He said the GST-based estimate was closely matching the First Advance Estimates of the Planning Department, which are based on sample surveys, with the variation being only around 0.6 percentage points. According to him, the close correlation demonstrated the potential of GST data for real-time economic assessment.
|
The Commercial Taxes Department has developed an AI-based analytical methodology to calculate GVA using GST data generated by manufacturing units in the State. The system also incorporates e-way bill data to improve the accuracy of the estimates by taking into account the movement of goods into and out of the State.
|
Source: The New India Express
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Gujarat assembly on Thursday passed two bills, one amending the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act to bring it in line with decisions of the GST Council and other seeking to regulate the manufacture, storage, distribution, sale and quality control of livestock and poultry feed.
|
The Gujarat GST (Amendment) Bill, 2026 was brought to ensure consistency between the Central GST framework and Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The amendments will align state GST provisions with changes in central laws and facilitate uniform implementation of the revised provisions.
|
Presenting the bill, state finance minister Kanu Desai said the amendments would provide greater clarity on credit notes and enable quicker refunds under the inverted duty structure. He said the Rs 1,000 threshold for refunds on exported goods would also be removed.
At present, refunds are not granted when the amount is below Rs 1,000. An amendment to Section 54 will remove the threshold for refund claims relating to exported goods on which tax has been paid, allowing such refunds to be processed irrespective of the amount.
|
The assembly also passed the Gujarat Livestock Feed, Poultry Feed And Mineral Mixture (Regulation Of Production, Storage, Distribution, Sale And Quality Control) Bill, 2026. The legislation seeks to establish a comprehensive legal framework governing the manufacture, storage, distribution and sale of livestock and poultry feed, mineral mixtures and compound feed ingredients, besides ensuring quality control.
Presenting the bill, state animal husbandry minister Jitu Vaghani said Gujarat has more than 106 lakh buffaloes and around 96 lakh cows, besides large populations of sheep, goats and poultry. He said the legislation was aimed at ensuring that livestock and poultry receive quality feed and that standards are maintained in its production and distribution.
|
Source: The Times of India
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State Bank of India, India’s largest lender, is developing a lending solution that will use UPI transaction data as a proxy for sales to extend loans to small businesses that do not have Goods and Services Tax registration, Ashwini Kumar Tewari, Managing Director, SBI, said at the Global Fintech Fest on Friday.
|
“UPI can substitute GST if regular sales are happening through it. We are developing the UPI solution without GST,” Tewari said.
|
SBI already processes business loans in about 10 minutes for customers with GST registration, PAN and other required data, Tewari said. The bank has disbursed Rs 1 trillion of such loans over the past one-and-a-half years.
|
The challenge now is to extend automated lending to businesses outside the GST system using UPI transaction data and other payment behaviour, subject to consent, he said. The aim is to build a profile of a small business based on its spending and revenue patterns even when those revenues are not readily available or regular.
|
The use of digital transaction data could mark a shift in how banks assess small businesses.
|
Asked whether the banking industry was moving from balance-sheet-based financing towards cash-flow-based lending, he said: “The banking sector is getting into cash flow.” The caveat, he said, is that the cash flow has to be visible through digital channels rather than physical cash.
|
For GST-registered businesses, the remaining friction in SBI’s automated lending process is a site visit to verify the existence of a shop or business premises. Tewari said such checks were still necessary because these processes could otherwise be gamed.
|
For businesses without GST registration, UPI could provide a digital trail of sales activity that lenders can use in underwriting.
|
Tewari said the approach could help address what he described as the funding gap in the MSME sector, particularly among micro businesses that have limited financial savings. “They are too small, they are micro. And unless we solve for micro, this segment doesn’t get solved,” he said.
|
Tewari flagged wallets as a potential way to reduce pressure on banking infrastructure, suggesting that transactions of up to Rs 100 could be handled through wallets.
|
Tewari said voice-based, multilingual and AI-driven services could further simplify access to credit, allowing customers to ask for a loan in ordinary language and have the request converted into the processes required by the bank.
|
Source: Business Standard
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The September 30, 2026 deadline for filing tax audit reports for assessment year (AY) 2026-27 is fast approaching, but the government has not announced any extension so far. Several Chartered Accountant (CA) associations have sought more time, citing the workload involved in completing audits, reconciliation issues and delays in getting audit-related information and utilities.
|
For taxpayers whose accounts are subject to audit, September 30 remains the applicable deadline unless the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) announces a change. Experts say taxpayers should continue working towards the existing deadline rather than wait for an extension.
|
CA associations seek more time
The demand for an extension has gained momentum as professional bodies have raised concerns over the time available to complete tax audits. The Chartered Accountants Association, Jalandhar has sought an extension of the tax audit deadline to October 31, while the Punjab Accountants Association and Rajasthan Consultants Association has also made a similar representation.
|
The associations have cited the delayed release of ITR forms and utilities, increased compliance requirements and the overlap between the August 31 non-audit ITR deadline and the September 30 tax audit deadline. They have argued that extending the audit deadline would provide CAs with more time for proper reconciliation and verification.
|
The request comes against the backdrop of a tax audit process that requires detailed reporting and verification across several financial and tax records.
|
Mohit Gupta, partner – direct & international taxation, PNAM & Co. LLP, said taxpayers and professionals should continue to work on the assumption that September 30 is the deadline unless the CBDT formally announces an extension.
|
“At present, taxpayers and professionals should proceed on the basis that September 30, 2026 remains the applicable deadline unless the CBDT issues a formal extension notification,” Gupta said.
|
He said the demand for additional time is not merely about getting more time to file the report. Auditors need to reconcile books of account with GST records, TDS/TCS data, AIS/TIS and other information before finalising the report.
|
“The demand for additional time is therefore primarily about ensuring quality and accuracy of compliance rather than merely seeking additional time for filing,” he said.
|
What are the biggest challenges?
The audit process has become increasingly data-intensive, with auditors required to examine information from multiple sources. Any mismatch between the books and tax records may need further investigation before the report can be finalised.
|
Dinesh K. Jain, managing partner, Dinesh Aarjav & Associates, said the pressure is coming from several issues at the same time.
|
“Three things are stacking up: a compressed working window, recurring portal issues — login failures, OTP delays, DSC errors, and glitches pulling AIS/TIS/Form 26AS data; and reconciliation friction,” Jain said.
|
Taxpayers may have to reconcile turnover with GST returns, verify TDS/TCS details, check AIS and TIS entries and match bank transactions with the books. Pending information from taxpayers can further delay the process.
|
Gupta said bank statements, fixed-asset details, loan schedules, related-party information, expense details and other supporting documents need to be available with the auditor before the report can be completed.
|
Another factor this year is the transition to the Income-tax Act, 2025. However, the tax audit relating to FY 2025-26 and AY 2026-27 continues under the Income-tax Act, 1961.
|
Will the government extend the deadline?
There is a precedent for extending the tax audit deadline. For FY 2024-25, the CBDT had extended the deadline for filing tax audit reports from September 30, 2025 to October 31, 2025.
|
However, last year's extension does not mean that the government will necessarily take a similar decision this year.
|
What should taxpayers do now?
With the deadline approaching, taxpayers whose accounts are subject to audit should start closing any pending gaps rather than wait for a government announcement.
|
The immediate priority should be to provide CAs with all outstanding documents and complete key reconciliations. This includes GST turnover, AIS/TIS and Form 26AS, bank and loan accounts, fixed assets, statutory dues, related-party transactions and expenses that may require tax-disallowance analysis.
|
Experts say taxpayers should work backwards from the deadline and ensure that their reports are not left for the final day.
|
“Work backward from September 30, not toward it,” Jain said.
|
Taxpayers should also remember that uploading the audit report is not the end of the process. The CA files the report electronically, after which the taxpayer has to approve it through their income-tax e-filing account.
|
Therefore, taxpayers should keep sufficient time for the approval step as well.
|
For now, September 30 remains the tax audit deadline for AY 2026-27. Unless the CBDT formally announces an extension, taxpayers and CAs should proceed on the basis that the existing deadline will apply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The document to claim ITC on RCM is Self Invoice and not the invoice issued by the vendor. Self invoice is raised in the month of payment of GST under RCM. And the timeline for taking credit begins from the date of self invoice.
|
If the vendor invoice is dated March 2026 but the RCM at that expense is paid in September 2026 then the self invoice would be raised in September 2026 after making GST payment and ITC time limit would be counted from September 2026.
|
The above has been clarified by the CBIC vide Press release dated 03.07.2019.
|
The condition of payment to the vendor within 180 days is not applicable to RCM as the tax is paid by the recipient himself.
|
Payment to Air transporter, bus service provider through as an agent
|
I am taking this point again to touch upon the payment condition of 180 days to the Indigo , Akasa, Spicejet, Red bus , the actual service provider. Normally the agent Thomas Cook or other local agents book tickets for the passenger. They raise their invoice for service rendered. And another invoice is raised to claim the reimbursement of ticket cost. Now the provision u/s 16(2) of CGST Act requires a recipient to make payment to service provider within180 days. This condition is not fulfilled as the payment is not made to airlines or bus operators. The payment is in fact made to Thomas Cook. And they pay to the airline.
|
Also, there is no ledger or account in the books of the recipient for Indigo, Akasa or Red bus.
|
In this case, a correlation of payment made on reimbursement invoice to Thomas Cook needs to be done with the airline ticket invoice details given as a support to that reimbursement invoice. Also, the airline invoices populate in GSTR 2B. The same can also be compared with invoice listings given by agents to match and claim the credit.
|
ISD credit is populated in table 4(A)(3) of GSTR 3B of the recipient on the filing of GSTR 6 by the Input Service Distributor (ISD).
|
The credit so distributed is supported by an invoice issued by ISD. The ISD is an office of the same company in a different state or in the same state. It may be a Head office or branch office which receive common services I.e. services received for all the branches including the same branch. Classic example is Tax audit, GST audit services.
|
The credit allocation to respective branches is done on the basis of turnover. It may be the previous month or the previous year. Previous year turnover is generally considered for allocation as the financials are audited.
|
The recipient of the ISD credit need not go into the working of ISD distribution. It may rely upon the ISD invoice for taking ITC. The responsibility of correct allocation lies on the ISD.
|
The timeline to claim credit on the ISD invoice does not hit by section 16(4). This is because the credit is first claimed by ISD following the condition prescribed in section 16 and distribution is a subsequent activity of just distributing the credit.
|
The basis for claiming ITC on import of goods is the 'Bill of Entry ' (BOE). This document prepared by the importer is verified by the customs officer and the basis of the same customs duty is paid.
|
The Customs portal (ICEGATE) automatically transmits the BOE details to the GST Portal , more specific to table 4(A)(1) of 3B.
|
The timeline of section 16(4) does not apply to BOE ITC. But there is another view that BOE is equivalent to Invoice and therefore the timeline of section 16 (4) applies to BOE as well.
|
BOE ITC also appears in GSTR 2B. There are notices when the importer claims ITC basis BOE copy when the details are not populated into 2B. On submission of BOE copy officers do accept the same and waive off the notice.
|
However, to pull the details to 2B from icegate you may go to Services > User Services > Search BoE.
|
Office rent or godown rent is generally paid on the basis of an agreement. The owner does not raise a monthly invoice. However, he files GSTR 1 regularly. The details also populate into 2B of the recipient. Whether the absence of invoice fulfils the condition of section 16(2)(a) of CGST Act? The answer is No.
|
An education to the owner is required on the importance of actually issuing an invoice. Till then the ITC can be taken on the basis of 2B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in GVK Jaipur Expressway Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. issued notice in the Special Leave Petition filed by the Assessee challenging the judgment of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, which had dismissed its writ petition against a total GST demand of Rs. 14,06,54,640/-, wherein the Assessee contended that neither the Show Cause Notice (“SCN”) nor the adjudication order was duly served upon it and that the service was allegedly effected by merely uploading the same on the GST Common Portal. Taking note of the submission that the Hon’ble Madras High Court and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court have viewed such portal-upload as incomplete service, particularly where the relevant notices/orders may be referable to two separate tabs, namely “View Additional Notices/Orders” and “View Notices and Orders”, the Hon’ble Supreme Court issued notice, returnable in four weeks.
|
GVK Jaipur Expressway Pvt. Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) was issued an order in FORM GST DRC-07 dated February 29, 2024, raising a demand of Rs. 3.39 crores, wherein it was specifically found that the Petitioner did not discharge its due GST liability through FORM GST DRC-13 for the FY 2018-19 and accordingly, the demand along with interest and penalty was imposed under Section 74 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the RGST Act”)/ the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”).
|
The said order was not challenged by the Petitioner in appeal. Consequently, vide order dated December 19, 2025, the bank account of the Petitioner was attached against the total demand, including tax and interest, of Rs. 14,06,54,640/-.
|
Aggrieved, the Petitioner filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court contending that it did not come to know about the orders passed by the GST Authorities and that the SCN as well as the order in FORM GST DRC-07 were not properly communicated and placed on the GST Portal. The Petitioner further relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in Eagle Trans Shipping and Logistics India Private Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. , wherein the assessee therein was allowed to file an appeal on the ground that a person cannot be left remediless, if the time period for filing of appeal has expired and there are valid reasons for the delay in filing of the appeal.
|
However, the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in GVK Jaipur Expressway Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. dismissed the writ petition, holding that a deliberate ignorance had been shown towards the SCN and the order, since it is not possible for a company to remain unaware of an order passed under Section 74, more so, when it continues to hold its GST registration and would, therefore, be filing regular monthly and annual returns. The Court further noted that neither an appeal was filed nor any attempt was made to file an appeal, and instead, the Petitioner had merely moved a rectification application seeking rectification of the order. Holding that equity does not lie in favour of the Petitioner and distinguishing the judgment in Eagle Trans Shipping (supra), the writ petition was dismissed.
|
Aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition, the Petitioner filed the present Special Leave Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
|
Whether service of the SCN and the adjudication order by merely uploading the same on the GST Common Portal constitutes valid service, particularly where the relevant notices/orders may be referable to two separate tabs, namely “View Additional Notices/Orders” and “View Notices and Orders”?
|
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 25965 of 2026 held as under:
|
- Noted that, the Petitioner had raised the issue of non-service of the notice as well as the order, and that the notice was allegedly served by uploading it on the Common Portal.
- Observed that, as per the Petitioner, the Hon’ble Madras High Court as well as the Hon’ble Delhi High Court have viewed service of notice by uploading on the portal as incomplete, particularly where the relevant information may be referable to two tabs, namely, “View Additional Notices/Orders” and “View Notices and Orders”, and that the Petitioner’s case is squarely covered by the said decisions.
- Accordingly, issued notice in the SLP, returnable in four weeks.
- The case is tentatively listed on September 11, 2026 (computer generated date).
Section 169 of the CGST Act prescribes the modes of service of any decision, order, summons, notice or other communication, namely: (a) by giving or tendering it directly or by a messenger/courier; (b) by registered post, speed post or courier with acknowledgement due; (c) by e-mail; (d) by making it available on the common portal; (e) by publication in a newspaper; or (f) by affixation. Further, Section 169(2) of the CGST Act provides that every such communication shall be deemed to have been served on the date on which it is tendered, published or affixed, as the case may be.
|
The moot question, which has divided the High Courts, is whether mere uploading of the SCN/order on the Common Portal under Section 169(1)(d) of the CGST Act, by itself, constitutes valid and effective service, especially in cases where such notices/orders were housed under the “View Additional Notices/Orders” tab, which was not readily visible to taxpayers, as against the regular “View Notices and Orders” tab. Notably, taking cognizance of this anomaly, the GSTN re-designed the portal in January 2024 to merge both the tabs under a single window, which itself is a tacit acknowledgment of the confusion caused by the twin-tab architecture.
|
A consistent line of decisions has favoured the taxpayer on this issue. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in East Coast Constructions and Industries Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) and in Sabari Infra Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) set aside ex parte orders where the notices/orders were merely uploaded under the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab without any effective communication to the taxpayer. Similarly, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Anhad Impex v. Assistant Commissioner held that uploading of the SCN under the “Additional Notices” tab did not amount to sufficient communication and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. also extended the benefit of doubt to the taxpayer where the order was reflected under the “Additional Notices and Orders” tab. Further, the Madurai Bench of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in Mrs. K. Balakrishnan, Balu Cables v. O/o. the Assistant Commissioner of GST (2024) went a step ahead to hold that where no response is forthcoming from the taxpayer to the notices uploaded on the portal, the Department ought to explore other effective modes of service prescribed under Section 169 of the CGST Act, such as RPAD, instead of mechanically completing the formality by portal upload.
|
Per contra, a contrary line of decisions, including that of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in Poomika Infra Developers v. State Tax Officer (January 2025), has taken the view that making a notice/order available on the Common Portal is itself a statutorily prescribed and independent mode of service under Section 169(1)(d) of the CGST Act, that the modes prescribed thereunder are alternative and not sequential, and hence, service stands complete upon such upload. The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, in the impugned judgment, has adopted a similar approach, albeit resting primarily on the conduct of the taxpayer in exhibiting “deliberate ignorance”.
|
The issuance of notice by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the present SLP is, therefore, a significant development, as the verdict would authoritatively settle the divergence amongst the High Courts on the validity and sufficiency of portal-based service under Section 169 of the CGST Act. The outcome would have a direct bearing on a large number of ex parte adjudications, consequential recovery/attachment proceedings, and appeals barred by limitation under Section 107 of the CGST Act, where the taxpayers’ primary grievance is want of effective service. Until the issue is settled, taxpayers would be well-advised to regularly monitor all the tabs on the Common Portal and keep their e-mail and contact details updated, while the Department, on its part, should adopt supplementary modes of service where no response is received, so that adjudication does not get reduced to an empty formality in breach of the principles of natural justice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let us see some scenario where Input tax credit claim need critical thinking -
|
Short quantity / damaged quantity
Sometime the goods are received in short quantity due to loss in transit. Or sometime some unit of goods get damaged while unloading of the goods from the vehicle. So, the quantity as mentioned in the invoice is not equal to the quantity actually received by the buyer. In this case, there are two methods of accounting the receipt of the goods. First one is accounting of the net quantity received . Second , account the full quantity mentioned on the invoice and then raise credit note for the short or damaged quantity.
|
The second method seems helpful in performing reconciliation of the purchases with GSTR-2B. As in 2B the invoice and credit note details are captured separately. Thus, the total quantity in books matches with the total quantity on invoice and the credit note in books will match with credit note sheet in GSTR-2B .
|
A question may arise as to why would a buyer account full quantity when he had received a lesser quantity and then account for the short quantity with a credit note? He would simply account the net quantity received.
|
But the method of accounting invoice and credit note separately would certainly give a clarity to the buyer and also to the department officer. It is easier to explain the match of the ITC in books with ITC in invoice sheet in 2B and credit note in books with the Credit note sheet in 2B.
|
Retention money
This concept is common in construction sector where the service receiver holds some part of the amount in every RA bill till the entire civil project gets completed. Once the project is completed may be in 6 months or 1 year or may be 1.5 years' time the money on hold may be released thereafter.
|
A civil work may include construction of new factory building or admin building or major expansion to the existing building. RA - Running Account means the tracking of a project milestone and raising invoice according to the completion of the project.
|
There is a condition u/s 16(2) of CGST Act, 2017 to claim ITC. The section requires the buyer to make full payment (basic value + GST) to the vendor. Since the payment is on hold the proportionate credit to the extend on hold payment the ITC need to be reversed.
|
There exist different view that payment of agreed value should be considered for payment instead of considering the invoice value. The quantum of payment is agreed by both the parties and statutory law should not insist on making payment of invoice value.
|
Free samples
Some quantity of goods are generally given to the distributor free of cost to boost sales. This is required to create market for new product. The free quantity eligibility depends upon the turnover of the distributor. For instance, if you buy 10 quantity you will get 2 quantity free. Similarly, on 100 quantity purchase, 20 quantity would be given as free. This is not a "buy one get one free concept" but it is a commitment of selling a targeted quantity of goods to the buyer and free goods are reward for that.
|
The movement of goods are taken place through a Delivery Challan mentioning value of goods and GST. The value of goods is generally MRP or market value of similar product. Such nominal value also required for e-way bill purpose.
|
Buy one get one free
'Buy one and get another one free' is one of the marketing techniques. The free product is given through invoice. It is shown on the face of the invoice.
|
It appears that one quantity is given free when another quantity is purchased. But the recent Circular clarifies that even though one quantity appears to be free but in practice the cost of another product is embedded in the cost of the first product purchased by paying cost. Accordingly, there is no need for reversal of ITC on goods given as free on face of invoice.
|
Annual Maintenance Contract (AMC) Service
The classic example of AMC contract is Air conditioner (AC) service. The service provider charges AMC for services to be given in next 12 months at the beginning of the year itself and raise tax invoice with GST. But since the service receipt is scattered over a period of 12 months , the question arises whether full GST credit is eligible at first month itself or wait till 12 months to become eligible to claim credit?
|
The invoice copy is received, the invoice appears in 2B , tax is paid by supplier, etc. and it is recorded in books by the recipient also. In practice the ITC is taken on receiving the invoice and matching the details with 2B.
|
GSTIN cancellation
It may happen that GSTIN of the supplier was active at the time of issuing invoice but later-on their GSTIN got cancelled. The ITC may be rejected by the officer because of cancelled GSTIN of the supplier. If the ITC is negligible then reversal the ITC. Otherwise, wait for the auditor to point it out and then justify with the case law that 'Lex Non Cogit ad Impossibilia' and other valid justifications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Input tax Credit (ITC) should be correctly recorded in the books of accounts. Timely recording in books is of great advantage. It helps in working capital management.
|
Sometime the invoices are received at the reception of the office but not forwarded to the accounts department. And sometime the invoices are with the procurement team but due to service pendency or issue in service the invoice is held by that department. These practical business issues leads to delay in accounting the invoices. These invoices then remain as a reconciliation item in the GST return working.
|
GSTR-2B is a facilitation of the government to the recipient to make them aware that these are their purchases. We can say that it is similar to 26AS statement of Income tax. GSTR-2B credit cannot be directly accommodated in the books because they are only a reflection of your suppliers' compliance to you, and not a complete purchases. But certainly a very helpful report which a tax payer can rely upon and comply GST.
|
IMS (Invoice Management System) is a real time statement where invoices uploaded by the vendor is populated in it. Even if you don't follow the IMS procedure of acceptance, rejection and on-hold activity but certainly you can use it so ascertain the purchases you made during the period. You may also follow up with the vendor or with internal stakeholder to collates invoices so that you can record it in books of accounts timely.
|
Tax should be paid by the vendor to the government. This is one of the condition given u/s 16 of CGST Act, 2017 to take ITC as you already aware of. Some vendors does their tax compliance through a tax consultant. With the volume of work the consultant has they may skip to upload your invoice in the GSTR-1 return. It may also happen that tax is also not paid to the government. In such cases, the ITC is denied to you (buyer). You must highlight it to the vendor and give opportunity to regularise the compliance by uploading the invoice and making payment to the government. If that does not happen even after repeated request then you may recover the tax component from your vendor ledger.
|
In line with this, you may enter a GST clause in the agreement (oral or written) that if GST is not populated in GSTR-2B then you will be withholding the GST component. Since you already paid the tax component to the vendor , getting ITC rejected would end paying tax again to the government. Hence, recovering that part from the vendor is a correct course of action. Also, the vendor is not suppose to profit out of the tax collected from buyer. He is an agent of the government. He must remit that tax to the government. He is an agent in the manner that he collects the tax from customer and remit to the government. He cannot skip doing his job.
|
As an alternate , I think the GST can work like TDS (Tax deducted at Source) where buyer withhold GST from the payment to the vendor and deposit it directly to the government. So, every transaction would be reported in return on monthly basis (as many taxpayer are monthly filer) and it would populate to the vendor for offsetting against their GST payable.
|
In this TDS like compliance the challenge would be that the buyer need to make the payment to government on monthly basis despite of the payment terms agreed with the vendor. The payment terms are 30 days , 60 days or in some cases 90 days. This is generally followed. Exceptional payment terms of 180 days or more also exist in a commercial transaction.
|
What do you think of any other challenges if TDS concept of tax payment introduced in GST? Put you thoughts in the comment section below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no free lunches in this world. India's businesses just found out the one they'd been eating for years had a bill attached all along.
|
For years, UPI has been treated by businesses as a payment channel with virtually no direct merchant cost. The proposed MDR framework changes that assumption. More importantly, the change is not confined to payment costs it creates consequences for accounting, GST, reconciliation, pricing and internal controls.
|
Since, parliament has given accent to the Taxation and Other Laws (Amendment) Bill, thus from October 15, 2026, there will be levy of merchant discount rate charges (MDR Charges) on UPI payments on transactions above the prescribed threshold limit.
|
For an industry built on the promise of "free," that single decimal point affects business's economics. The MDR fees of 0.4% as proposed by Government of India will be levied by the NPCI on the amount to be credited to the merchant, directly impacting the books of accounts of the merchant.
|
From October 15, the finance and Accounting team will have to add a new head to the chart of accounts, prepare sales reconciliation, and will have to account for GST input tax credit.
|
The accounting story is where it gets interesting, and where most of the coverage so far has stopped short. Before getting to the books, though, it's worth understanding why zero-MDR ends now rather than at some other time because the mechanism the Government used to open this door says something about how much room it's kept to redraw the line again.
|
The Legal Mechanism
The zero-MDR mandate was never a commercial choice it was a statutory bar under Section 10A of the Payment and Settlement System Act, 2007 which prohibited any charge on payments made through the electronic modes prescribed under Section 269SU of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (UPI and RuPay debit cards among them).
|
However, the Taxation and Other Laws (Amendment) Act, 2026 has removed the blanket statutory protection into a notification-dependent one. Zero-charge protection now applies only to whatever electronic payment modes the Central Government chooses to notify. A mode the Government does not notify simply falls outside the bar, and the ordinary commercial freedom to price a service applies.
|
On 14 September 2026, the Government exercised that power and notified UPI transactions up to ₹2,000 transactions as protected.
|
What attracts MDR ?
General P2M transactions above ₹2,000: 0.4% MDR, shared among issuing/remitter bank, acquiring bank, payment service provider and UPI app, capped at ₹300 for transactions of ₹75,000 and above.
|
- Essential/thin-margin sectors (railways, telecom, insurance, fuel, agricultural inputs): a flat ₹5 per transaction above ₹2,000, giving cost certainty rather than a percentage exposure.
- Capital-market transactions (mutual funds, securities, stockbrokers, dealers): 0.02%, capped at ₹300.
- Small merchants: those receiving under ₹1 lakh a month through UPI QR codes remain fully exempt from the new charge, keeping kirana-scale acceptance untouched while pulling in higher-volume merchants.
It has been stated that the merchant has to bear the cost of MDR charge, and customers do not pay this. Banks have been directed to ensure merchants don't pass MDR through, and UPI app providers are barred from levying platform fees or hidden charges. This is a cost inside the merchant payment ecosystem which is precisely why it has to be absorbed in the books, not billed separately.
|
However, increasing the cost for merchant will rise the rate for the goods or service, stating MDR a non transferable charge is effectively hold zero value.
|
Accounting Treatment: Where the Money Actually Goes
Because the merchant cannot invoice MDR separately to the customer, it has to be built into cost of sales or booked as an indirect expense not shown as a deduction from sales revenue.
|
Example: A merchant sells goods worth ₹10,000, taxed at 18% GST, invoice value ₹11,800, paid via an eligible UPI transaction.
|
In percentage terms, the merchant gives up roughly 0.48% of the transaction value (0.4% MDR plus GST on that MDR) small in isolation, but on high-volume, thin-margin businesses, a recurring leak that compounds across thousands of transactions a month.
|
Suggested journal entries:
|
This means two changes to the accounting system before 15 October:
|
- (1) a new chart-of-accounts head an indirect expense ledger for MDR and
- (2) a process to book that expense simultaneously with every UPI receipt above ₹2,000, rather than net it off silently against revenue.
Most POS/accounting software will need a rule change here; reconciliation teams should not be manually adjusting this transaction by transaction.
|
The merchant will separately receive an invoice from the UPI ecosystem participant (routed via the beneficiary/acquiring bank) for the MDR service fee and the GST on it.
|
A GST-registered business, once it satisfies the conditions under Section 16 of the CGST Act - a valid tax invoice, receipt of service, GST actually paid by the supplier and return filed, and payment made to the vendor can claim input tax credit on that GST.
|
But ITC eligibility is not instantaneous: it depends on the counterparty's compliance (GSTR-2B matching) and on payment being made within the statutory window, which means a temporary working-capital block between the deduction and the credit being available to set off.
|
Where the Full Cost Becomes Burden
For businesses dealing in GST-exempt goods or services, or registered under the composition scheme, there is no ITC to claim. The entire MDR and the GST on it becomes a straight cost, with no offsetting credit this group absorbs the charge in full, and it should be modelled as a direct margin hit, not a pass-through compliance item.
|
Refunds: An Open Question, With a Likely Answer
If a customer pays via UPI and later seeks a refund, MDR has already been deducted on the original inflow. Whether MDR is deducted again on the refund leg effectively taxing the same transaction twice is not yet settled by the framework.
|
Card-network practice offers a reasonable precedent: MDR is typically not refunded to the merchant when a sale is reversed, meaning the merchant bears the original MDR cost even on a cancelled sale, and a second charge on the refund transfer itself would be an additional cost layered on top.
|
Given the Government's position that merchants bear the MDR cost, businesses with high return rates (electronics, apparel, e-commerce) should plan for the worst case MDR absorbed on both legs until NPCI or the banks clarify treatment, and build this into pricing or refund-policy assumptions now rather than after the fact.
|
Who Gets Hit Hardest
The businesses most exposed are those taking instant, direct payment from end consumers - hospitals, electronics retailers, medical stores, restaurants, and similar high-ticket, walk-in businesses where UPI is the default payment rail and transaction values routinely cross ₹2,000. Whereas, formal B2B businesses are comparatively insulated: they typically settle through NEFT/IMPS/RTGS for vendor and institutional payments precisely because those channels preserve a documented audit trail, and those rails sit outside this MDR framework entirely.
|
In other words, the dividing line isn't business size it's payment channel and average ticket size.
|
The ₹1 lakh/month small-merchant exemption pulls the smallest UPI-QR acceptors out of this analysis altogether, which narrows the real-world impact to mid-size and larger merchants transacting at volume - exactly the segment that should be updating its accounting systems before the October cutover.
|
A Live Legal Overhang
Before finance teams treat this as settled, it's worth noting that a PIL has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the Finance Ministry's 14 September notification and the amended Section 10A itself, in the case of Anjan Datta vs. Union of India & Ors. arguing that “...the framework itself acknowledges that the merchant must bear a charge on each qualifying receipt. For low-margin traders, service providers and digitally dependent businesses, that cost necessarily enters the price structure, reduces working capital, or induces refusal of UPI and splitting of transactions. A bare direction against an expressly recognised economic consequence does not eliminate the burden,"
|
Further, it was argued that “A transaction of ₹2,001 attracts a percentage charge while one of ₹2,000 does not; a merchant may lose protection by crossing a monthly aggregate boundary unrelated to margin, turnover, geography or ability to bear the fee; and the framework grants a proportionately larger benefit to very high-value transactions through the cap. These cliffs are capable of distorting behaviour and discriminating between similarly situated merchants”.
|
It will be interesting to see judiciary’s view on the levy of MDR charges, but the finance and accounting team must tighten their belt to accommodate the MDR charges in the books of accounts and for statutory compliances.
|
Action Checklist for Finance Teams
- Add a dedicated MDR expense ledger and an input-GST-on-MDR ledger to the chart of accounts.
- Configure billing/POS systems to auto-book MDR and GST-on-MDR against every eligible UPI receipt above ₹2,000, rather than netting silently.
- Build a vendor-invoice tracking process for MDR bills from the acquiring/beneficiary bank, so ITC claims aren't missed and Section 16 conditions are monitored.
- For composition-scheme or exempt-supply businesses, re-model margins to absorb MDR as a direct cost with no offsetting credit.
- Decide a refund policy assumption now treat MDR as non-recoverable on the original sale, and budget for possible re-deduction on the refund leg until clarified.
- Track the Supreme Court proceeding, but don't defer system changes pending its outcome the framework is live from 15 October regardless.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of Mr. Pradyuman Joshi. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose and for the reader’s personal non-commercial use. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation. The author does not accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Further, no portion of our article or newsletter should be used for any purpose(s) unless authorized in writing and we reserve a legal right for any infringement on usage of our article or newsletter without prior permission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Press release no. 2300883 dated 18.08.2026
|
Top Tax Officials Deliberate on Key Issues Concerning the Income Tax Department at Conclave
|
The two-day conclave of Principal Chief Commissioners of Income Tax and Principal Directors General of Income Tax, organized by the Income Tax Department, concluded today, August 18, in Jaipur. The conclave was chaired by Shri Ravi Agrawal, Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT).
|
The event was attended by Members of the CBDT—Shri Pankaj Kumar Mishra, Shri Sanjay Bahadur, Shri Prasenjit Singh, Ms. G. Aparna Rao, Ms. Pallavi Agrawal and Shri Sunil Kumar Singh—along with Principal Chief Commissioners, Principal Directors General, Commissioners of Income Tax (Administration) and other senior officers from across the country.
|
The conclave witnessed extensive deliberations on key issues concerning the Income Tax Department, including e-HRMS, service matters, litigation, reservation policy, taxpayer services, future projects, the Systems Directorate, capacity building, infrastructure, expenditure budget, TDS administration and inter-agency coordination. Senior officers also shared their views and suggestions on the challenges and future priorities of the Department. A documentary produced by the Media Cell of the CBDT was also screened during the programme.
|
Shri Ravi Agrawal, Chairman, CBDT, held open and interactive discussions with senior officers on the future direction and functioning of the Department and emphasized the need for an actionable roadmap based on the suggestions received. Detailed discussions were also held on infrastructure requirements and essential facilities for Income Tax offices across the country.
|
The programme was organized under the guidance of Shri Ravi Agrawal, Chairman, CBDT, and under the leadership of Shri Sumeet Kumar, Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajasthan. Shri Anil Kumar Bhardwaj, Commissioner of Income Tax (Administration & TPS), Jaipur; Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Administration); Shri Surendra Yadav, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Headquarters); and other officers and staff made significant contributions towards the successful conduct of the conclave.
|
At the conclusion of the programme, Ms. G. Aparna Rao, Member (TPS&R), CBDT, delivered the valedictory address. Shri Anil Kumar Bhardwaj, Commissioner of Income Tax (Administration & TPS), Jaipur, thereafter extended a vote of thanks to the Chairman, CBDT, Members of the Board, senior officers and all officers and staff associated with the successful organization of the conclave.
|
The conclave concluded on a positive and forward-looking note, with a shared commitment to translating the deliberations and suggestions into concrete action towards strengthening the Department and enhancing taxpayer services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Press release dated 18.08.26
|
Based on ground intelligence and analysis of data on outward foreign remittances, the Income Tax Department has identified several suspicious entities that remitted large amounts of foreign exchange over the last three years. A nationwide network of entities engaged in remitting funds abroad was uncovered during a search operation conducted on a group of fictitious charitable trusts involved in providing accommodation entries against bogus donations/contributions. Preliminary ground verification revealed that the entities making these remittances were either non-filers or were filing income-tax returns showing very small turnovers. The turnovers had no apparent correlation with the large amounts of money being remitted abroad. They also did not appear to match the stated purpose of the remittances, such as payment for freight, import of software, or import of consulting services. Further ground-level intelligence revealed that these entities were not actually operating from the addresses declared by them.
|
Further analysis of the data also revealed that a large number of Form 15CB certificates were issued by a relatively small group of professionals. The remitted funds were also received by a clustered group of entities. Form 15CB, read with Rule 37BB of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (corresponding to Form 146 read with Rule 220 of the Income-tax Rules, 2026), requires the Accountant certifying a foreign remittance to verify its taxability with reference to the books of account and other relevant documents. However, the findings raise concerns about whether adequate due diligence was carried out by the Accountants before issuing these certificates.
|
On 18.08.2026, the Department launched a nationwide detailed verification exercise to verify these foreign remittances, focussing on shell entities, the persons behind them, and the professionals who have issued Form 15CB certificates. Entities located in districts along the country’s land borders and remitting significant amounts of money abroad have also been covered in the exercise. The exercise has covered approximately 394 entities (including 117 entities located in land-border States), and 36 professionals.
|
The Department emphasises that Accountants issuing certificates in Form 15CB/Form 146 are expected to exercise due care, diligence and professional judgment. They should properly examine the underlying transactions and relevant facts before certifying the remittances, as these certifications play an important role in maintaining trust in the system.
|
Further investigations are currently underway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Months long investigation reveals defrauding exchequer of over Rs. 2,500 crore (approx.); Rs. 75 lakh cash, 160 MT areca nuts seized (approx.); Nine arrested
|
Syndicates imported areca nuts into India from Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and other South-East Asian countries by mis-declaring country of origin as Bangladesh
|
Licence of Customs Broker firm responsible for clearance of most of the fraudulent imports of areca nuts suspended
|
Press release no. 2300102 dated 16.08.2026
|
The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), in a month-long intelligence-led operation, has dismantled a major network involved in importing South-East Asian areca nuts into India by falsely declaring them as Bangladeshi origin and fraudulently availing concessional duty benefits under the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA). The investigation has so far revealed a potential revenue loss of more than Rs. 2,500 crore. Nine persons have been arrested in connection with the case.
|
|
The import of areca nuts into India attracts a Basic Customs Duty (BCD) of 100%. However, eligible imports of areca nuts made under SAFTA agreement are fully exempt from customs duty. The areca nuts originating from Bangladesh are entitled to exemption under SAFTA if imports meet the prescribed Rules of Origin criterion.
|
|
|
|
|
Intelligence gathered and developed by DRI indicated that certain syndicates were fraudulently claiming the SAFTA benefits on a very large scale on imports of areca nuts. While they were importing areca nuts originating and sourced from Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and other South-East Asian countries, they were mis-declaring the country of origin of areca nuts imported into India as Bangladesh.
|
|
|
Thereafter, simultaneous searches were conducted at multiple premises linked to importers, Customs Brokers and IEC holders in Kolkata and Visakhapatnam. Several incriminating documents and substantial evidences establishing the South-East Asian origin of Areca nuts were recovered. DRI officers also recovered and seized around Rs. 75 lakh in cash, believed to be sale proceeds of the illegally imported goods. A live consignment of around 160 MT of areca nuts.
|
The investigations so far have revealed huge scale of fraudulent imports of areca nuts in which exchequer has been duped of customs duty in excess of Rs 2,500 crore in recent years. The masterminds were facilitating the import of areca nuts from South-East Asian countries into one of the EPZ in Bangladesh and thereafter routing the goods to India merely changing containers and bags and passing them off as Bangladeshi-origin areca nuts. They had fraudulently obtained SAFTA Certificates of Origin from Bangladeshi authorities. The masterminds were charging substantial commissions from Indian importers for arranging the routing, documentation, clearance and transportation of the consignments and massive collection of payments in cash... The investigation has also brought to light the use of hawala channels and dummy entities for movement and layering of the financial proceeds.
|
Investigation has further revealed that one Customs Broker firm was particularly responsible for clearance of most of the fraudulent imports of areca nuts identified in the case. Consequent to the ongoing investigation by DRI, the Customs Broker's licence has been suspended by the competent authority. Nine persons have been arrested so far in connection with the case.
|
Such illegal imports adversely impact domestic areca nut growers and legitimate trade by creating unfair price distortion, and disrupting the level playing field for legitimate businesses. Besides causing huge loss to the Government revenue, these illegal activities also undermine regulated trade practices and economic security in the border regions.
|
With this operation, DRI has effectively disrupted a well-organised network involved in systematic mis-declaration of country of origin, fraudulent availment of SAFTA benefits and large-scale evasion of customs revenue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. Lawgics by Ms.Nidhi Aggarwal
|
|
Ms. Nidhi Aggarwal is delighted to present GST Notes/Law in a simplified manner under the title “ Lawgics ”. The note is prepared in a series of PDFs encompassing GST Law and the interpretations thereof in simple manner. The author with a great vision to spread complex GST law in a simple manner amongst the taxpayers, tax professionals, students and knowledge seeker is presenting the Lawgics in piecemeal at regular interval.
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. GST Notes by CMA Anil Sharma
1) Shri CMA Anil Sharma, Shri CMA Gurdev Singh Saini and Smt. CMA Bhawna Sharma posted Chapter-15 containing CGST Act in simple language in PPT format. This is to make dealers, professionals, academicians, students etc. understand the basics of GST laws. Each Chapter in CGST Act, 2017 is explained in the form of Slides as given below for easy understanding of the Act:
|
Chapter-15 slides given below:-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8) Book by CMA Anil Sharma
|
Book by CMA Anil Sharma, B.Com (Honrs), M.Com, FCMA co-author of the book "Handbook on GST Audit by Tax Authorities" has authored yet another book title Goods & Service Tax – Some Perceptions and Reflections. Buy now at Price Rs. 240- (Rs.300/- minus 20% Discount).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You wish to publish your Article?
|
If you wish to share your article with maximum readers then please send the article at taxupdate.otu@gmail.com. We shall publish it with all due credit to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hope the above updates is of use to you. Please share your input and feedback at taxupdate.otu@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
Visit our website
|
OTU provides you
|
- Articles on various topics
|
|
- Media - GST, Income Tax & Press R.
|
|
- Notes / Newsletter etc.
|
|
|
|
|