17 firms given notices as part of GST evasion probe
(article which remained unpublished)
DC Correspondent
Hyderabad, Oct. 16: The high-powered committee constituted to investigate the alleged Rs 1,400 crore GST evasion by 75 firms headed by the former commissioner of commercial tax department T. K. Sreedevi has picked 17 of them for further probe. Of them is one Edukondalu Labour Contractor Cooperative Society with an insignificant turnover and that too closed on 20 March, 2023 was also chosen.
They are part of the 75 entities whose GST transactions were alleged to have been masked by the official’s facing allegations.
The society registered on 1 July, 2017 ceased to exist as its registration was cancelled on 20 March, 2023. It was accused of short payment/non-payment of output tax and ordered to pay Rs 7,56,800 in SGST and CGST. Prima facie with the documents on hand sources aver there is no failure in discharging duties by the officials.
Documents available with the Deccan Chronicle clearly state that the allegation about not serving notices to this society by officials facing allegations are false. The society which had its office in Saroornagar of Ranga Reddy district mostly executed works for the government by way of cement roads, laying pipelines and foot paths.
The data once submitted by a dealer on the GSTIN website cannot be tinkered by him or the officials. The data therefore cannot be masked by anyone as alleged in the case.
The documents reveal that notices were indeed issued to the society on 1 March, 2021. The society registered on 1 July, 2017 ceased to exist as it cancelled its registration on 20 March, 2023. In the interim period the firm showed nil returns as per its records in 2017-18, while in the 2018-19 and 2019-20 periods it showed its GSTR-3B to be lower than its GSTR-2A leaving a due payable to the assessee, the society itself. Registered in the Saroor Nagar jurisdiction the notice was issued by Ravikumar Chinta the assistant commissioner.
It may be noted that GSTR-3B represents monthly returns which include purchases, sales and tax payable by the dealer. While GSTR-2A is a statement of purchases made by the taxpayer. The officers rely on the records filed by the firms and are not mandated to physically check every entity. The duty if any on this score would be on the jurisdictional officer and not the officers facing allegations in this case. Notices are issued if output tax in GSTR-3B is less than output tax recorded in GSTR-1.
In this case in 2018-19 while the GSTR-3B of the society was Rs 50,229.96 its GSTR-2A (this represents the society’s statement of purchases made by it) was Rs 52,443.96. This situation warrants the department in turn to pay the society Rs 2,214 for the financial year in question. In the financial year 2019-20 the GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B were almost the same at Rs 1,44,308. Notices are issued if GSTR-3B is less than GSTR-1. The society’s GSTR-3B was Rs 59,798.74 and GSTR-2A was Rs 61,775.58 leaving a due of Rs 1,976 payable by the department itself. The society did not show any turnovers in returns between the financial years 2020-21 and 2022-23 as per the records.
The notice issued to the society cites turnover declared in GSTR-3B is less than that obtained from TDS deductor (this refers to tax deduction by government departments to whom the said entity executed some works. It further cited differences in input tax and output tax credits. On examination of records it cites discrepancies resulting in short payment/non-payment of output tax and ordered the society to pay Rs 7,56, 800 in SGST and CGST put together. This amount cited is regarding a discrepancy noticed in GSTR-7 for which notice was issued. GSTR-7 is filed by the respective government department where the work was executed. Prima facie with the documents on hand sources aver there is no failure in discharging duties by the officials.
The senior official who did not wish to be quoted said, “As subject experts our duty is to assist IIT Hyderabad in providing services as per our requirements. Returns are filed in GSTIN. The software is not able to generate a comprehensive show cause notice by identifying all the discrepancies between the returns, statements filed by the taxpayer and e-way bills generated. Development of this software was a work in progress which was shelved by the former commissioner Sreedevi. To this day states like Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Punjab, Delhi and Assam are relying solely on IIT Hyderabad.”
The officials who wished to remain anonymous say the entire case could turn out to be a case of making a mountain out of a molehill going by how it has turned out to be so far. (G Ram Mohan)