Section 75 of CGST Act, 2017 : Section 75: General Provisions Relating To Determination Of Tax

Explanation using Example

Imagine a business named "QuickTech Solutions" is under scrutiny for alleged GST evasion. The GST authorities issue a notice to QuickTech Solutions under Section 74, suspecting fraud or willful misstatement to evade tax. QuickTech Solutions challenges this notice in the Appellate Tribunal, which orders a stay on the notice.

According to Section 75(1) of the CGST Act, the period for which the Appellate Tribunal's stay is in effect will not be counted in the time limit for the authorities to issue an order as prescribed under Section 73 or 74.

Later, the Appellate Tribunal finds that the charges of fraud against QuickTech Solutions are not established. As per Section 75(2), the GST officer must then reassess the tax liability of QuickTech Solutions as if the notice had been issued under the more benign Section 73, which deals with cases without fraud or willful misstatement.

Moreover, if the Appellate Tribunal directs the GST authorities to issue a fresh order, they must do so within two years as stated in Section 75(3).

During these proceedings, QuickTech Solutions is entitled to an opportunity for a hearing, especially if they request one in writing or if an adverse decision is contemplated against them, in line with Section 75(4).

If QuickTech Solutions needs more time to prepare for the hearing, they can request an adjournment. However, as per Section 75(5), they cannot request more than three adjournments.

The final order from the GST officer will detail the decision and its basis, as required by Section 75(6), and the demand for tax, interest, and penalty cannot exceed what was originally specified in the notice (Section 75(7)).

If the Appellate Authority modifies the tax amount, the interest and penalty will be adjusted accordingly (Section 75(8)).

Interest is due on any short-paid or unpaid tax regardless of whether it's mentioned in the order (Section 75(9)).

The adjudication process is deemed concluded if an order isn't issued within the prescribed time limit (Section 75(10)).

And if QuickTech Solutions faces a penalty under Section 73 or 74, they won't be penalized again for the same act under a different provision (Section 75(13)).