News Update

CBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silverFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerCentre receives Rs 18.5 lakh crore tax revenue upto Feb monthUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayExpert Committee on developing GIFT IFSC as 'Global Finance and Accounting Hub' submits report to IFSCAIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEADefence Production issues notification for re-organisation of DGQAThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCBDT substitutes Form in ITR-5EV Revolution: Lessons for India to learn from US and China!London court green-signals auction of luxury apartment of fugitive Nirav ModiGovt consults RBI; finalises borrowing plan for first half of FY 2024-25Gadkari says Farmers’ protest is politically-motivatedVP calls upon women entrepreneurs to be 'Vocal for Local'America offers USD 10 mn bounty for information on ‘Blackcat’ hackers after UnitedHealth gets hitI-T- The order of the ITSC can only be reopened in cases of fraud or misrepresentation: HC8 persons including Hezbollah militants killed in Israeli strike on LebanonMacron pillories EU-South Africa trade deal; calls it ‘really bad’ in BrazilThailand’s Lower House okays Bill to legitimise same-sex marriageYellen warns China against clean energy dumpingMilky Way’s central black hole - Twisted magnetic field observedCus - Assessee has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that goods in question imported under air way bills/bills of entry were in fact filed by him and hence the only natural corollary available to Revenue is confiscation of same: CESTATSmall investors help Trump Media’s valuation skyrocket to USD 13 billionJustice Ritu Raj Awasthi joins as Judicial member of Lokpal
 
Section 50 of the CGST Act - an unwarranted dilemma

JANUARY 17, 2020

By Abhijit Saha

THERE is something peculiar happening with respect to Section 50 of the CGST Act. This section deals with interest on delayed payment of tax. The relevant portion is reproduced below for ease of reference:

Section 50. Interest on delayed payment of tax - (1) Every person who is liable to pay tax in accordance with the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder, but fails to pay  the tax or any part thereof  to the Government within the period prescribed, shall for the period for which the tax or any part thereof remains unpaid, pay, on his own, interest at such rate, not exceeding eighteen percent., as may be notified by the Government on the recommendation of the Council.

(2) The interest under sub-section (1) shall be calculated, in such manner as may be prescribed, from the day succeeding the day on which such tax was due to be paid.

(3) …

It is evident from above that the word  tax  has not been defined in the above section 50. So, it can be gross amount of tax or the net amount of tax. It is a matter of interpretation since the statute does not clarify. So, there is a room for interpretation. There was ambiguity as to whether interest is to be charged on gross amount of tax payable or the net amount of tax payable. The ambiguity was appreciated and admitted by the GST Council and accordingly the amendment of the of Section 50 of the CGST Act approved, to provide that interest should be charged only on the net amount of tax liability of the taxpayer, after taking into account the admissible input tax credit, i.e. interest would be leviable only on the amount payable through the electronic cash ledger.  

The Government brought in this amendment in the Budget, 2019 which was enacted as the Finance Act (2) of 2019 on 1st August 2019. This Finance Act by Section 100 inserted the following proviso in Section 50(1) of the CGST Act.

"Provided that the interest on tax payable in respect of supplies made during a tax period and declared in the return for the said period furnished after the due date in accordance with the provisions of section 39, except where such return is furnished after commencement of any proceedings under section 73 or section 74 in respect of the said period, shall be levied on that portion of the tax that is paid by debiting the electronic cash ledger".

So far so good. Now the problem comes. The above proviso would be effective from the date to be notified by the Central Government. Such notification has not yet been done. Hence, it is not yet effective. So, what will happen now? Should the tax payer pay interest on gross amount of tax or net amount of tax?

It is a settled position of the law that if the amendment of the law is clarificatory in nature, then it would have retrospective effect. But what would happen if the clarificatory law has not seen the light of the day? The present situation is fluid because the provision of Section 50 is not clear. The proviso to section 50 is enacted as law but the same is not effective till date. Central Government has not justified as to why the said enactment is not given effect to. It is causing immense hardship and confusion to the taxpayers at large. That is why the author has said in the beginning that something peculiar is happening with respect to Section 50 of the CGST Act.

Since the amendment is clarificatory in nature, if made effective, it would have retrospective effect. So, even if it is not made effective, the legislative intent is loud and clear that it is meant to be effective retrospectively. Hence by reasonable implication and permissible inference, it may be concluded that now, during the fluid situation, the interest is payable on the net amount of tax payable. Any other interpretation would negate the legislative intent and purpose. Also, if the interest is not calculated now on the net amount of tax payable, then once, the amendment is made effective, its retrospective effect would warrant a re-calculation of the interest amount which is payable now and unnecessary refund claim would increase the workload of both the taxpayer as well as the Department.

In passing, the author wants to raise the following questions as food for thought -

(i) Is there any time limit for the government to notify the effective date?

(ii) If the effective date is not notified at all, does it violate any provision of any law?

(The views expressed are strictly personal)

(DISCLAIMER : The views expressed are strictly of the author and Taxindiaonline.com doesn't necessarily subscribe to the same. Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. is not responsible or liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any interpretation, error, omission in the articles being hosted on the site)

 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Interest on Excess ITC

Dear Sir,

I have taken excess ITC in 17-18 and same has been reversed in Sept-18, I have sufficient balance in Electronic Credit ledger, so I have to pay interest or not...?

Posted by Dharmendrasinh Chudasama
 

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023