Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGST55th GST Council Meet: Issues Clarifications On To Remove Ambiguity And Legal...

55th GST Council Meet: Issues Clarifications On To Remove Ambiguity And Legal Disputes

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The 55th GST Council met under the Chairpersonship of Union Minister for Finance & Corporate Affairs Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman in Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, today. 

The council has recommended to issue circulars to provide clarity in the issues due to varied interpretations by the field formations so as to remove Ambiguity And Legal Disputes.

  1. Clarification regarding requirement of reversal of Input Tax Credit by electronic commerce operators in respect of supplies made under section 9(5) of CGST Act, 2017

The GST Council recommended that no proportional reversal of ITC under section 17 (1) or section 17 (2) of CGST Act, 2017 is required to be made by the ECO in respect of supplies for which they are required to pay tax under section 9(5) of CGST Act, 2017.

  1. Clarification on availability of Input Tax Credit as per section 16(2)(b) of CGST Act, 2017 in respect of goods which have been delivered by the supplier at his (supplier’s) place of business 

The GST Council recommended to clarify that in an Ex-Works contract, where goods are delivered by the supplier to the recipient or a transporter at the supplier’s place of business, and the property in goods transfers to the recipient at that point, the goods are considered to be “received” by the recipient under section 16(2)(b) of CGST Act, 2017 and the recipient may claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) on such goods, subject to the conditions outlined in Sections 16 and 17 of the CGST Act, 2017.

  1. Clarification regarding applicability of late fee for delay in furnishing of FORM GSTR-9C and providing waiver of late fee on delayed furnishing of FORM GSTR-9C for the period from 2017-18 to 2022-23:

The GST Council recommended to clarify through a circular that the late fee under Section 47(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 is leviable for the delay in filing the complete annual return under Section 44 of the CGST Act, 2017, which includes both FORM GSTR-9 (Annual Return) and FORM GSTR-9C (Reconciliation Statement), where applicable.

For the annual returns pertaining to the period 2017-18 to 2022-23, the GST Council also recommended to issue notification under section 128 of CGST Act, 2017 for waiver of the amount of late fee for delayed filing of FORM GSTR-9C, which is in excess of the amount of late fee payable till the date of filing of FORM GSTR-9 for the said financial years, provided the FORM GSTR-9C is filed on or before 31st March 2025.

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 16, 2026.GSTGST REVOCATION ORDER QUASHED AFTER...

CBIC Circulars Not Binding On GSTAT; Inverted Duty Refund Available Where Inputs And Finished Goods Are Distinct: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Kolkata Bench, has upheld a refund...

Money Received by Intermediary Not Enough to Prove Public Servant Accepted Bribe: Supreme Court Acquits RPF Officer

The Supreme Court has acquitted a former Divisional Security Commissioner of the Railway Protection...

Loan Recovery Can’t Become “Instrument of Oppression”: Supreme Court Awards Rs.10 Lakh Compensation for Midnight Repossession of Truck

The Supreme Court has strongly deprecated the forcible repossession of a borrower’s truck by...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 16, 2026.GSTGST REVOCATION ORDER QUASHED AFTER...

CBIC Circulars Not Binding On GSTAT; Inverted Duty Refund Available Where Inputs And Finished Goods Are Distinct: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Kolkata Bench, has upheld a refund...

Money Received by Intermediary Not Enough to Prove Public Servant Accepted Bribe: Supreme Court Acquits RPF Officer

The Supreme Court has acquitted a former Divisional Security Commissioner of the Railway Protection...