Volum e 3
Is s ue MONTHLY
NEWSLETTER OF
2
FEBRUARY 2021
THE CENTRAL TAX
ZONE BENGALURU
The GST Seva Kendra
(Help Centre) at the CR
Building, Bengaluru
launches a whatsapp
outreach
The Month in Review
The GST Seva Kendra of
Bangalore Zone is now
available on Whatsapp.
This M-Seva - a taxpayer
facilitation mechanism is
one wherein taxpayers
can make queries on
GST matters to the
Whatsapp number +91-
9480258909 and receive
appropriate guidance /
clarification in the
matter.
The Help Centre stands
ready to meet its
enhanced service
protocols and would be
glad to be of assistance to
any taxpayer/ s that may
like make use of the
facility.
http://gstkarnataka.gov.in/m
ailquery.html
Returns Offline Tool Version
V2.3.1
https://www.gst.gov.in/dow
nload/returns
1|P a ge
Conspectus
The GST
this issue
Notification Updates (Jan 2021) P.2
GSTN Updates P.4
Case law Update P 9
(iii) making certain other changes
relating to seizure and confiscation,
On 1st February 2021, the Hon’ble filing of of appeal only on payment of a
Finance Minister presented the Union sum equal to twenty-five per cent of
Budget. The measures taken to simplify penalty imposed.
GST were highlighted in the Budget
speech. As always, this issue continues to
capture in brief the changes effected
The Finance Bill proposes certain during the month of January 2020 both
changes in the CGST Act and the IGST in law/ rules and the new circulars
Act on the basis of recommendations issued. This also brings in the important
made by the GST Council. These decisions that were recently
includes measures for: pronounced. We hope that this issue of
the Bengaluru Zone’s newsletter will
(i) facilitating taxpayers, such as
help you closely follow the changes that
removing the mandatory requirement of
have happened in GST.
getting annual accounts audited and
reconciliation statement, filing of the As usual, we look forward to receiving
annual return on self-certification basis your comments and feedback on gstcell-
and charging interest on net cash liability blr@gov.in.
with effect from the 1st July, 2017.
(ii) improving compliance, such as
-For the Editorial Team
availment of input tax credit only when
the details have been furnished by the
supplier in the statement of outward
supplies, validity of provisional Archana Nayak
attachment for a period, zero-rating on Joint Commissioner
payment of IGST only in specified cases (PCCO)
and linking it to the receipt of foreign
remittances.
©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021
Updates on Legal matters

(Notifications issued during January 2021)

Amendments made to the CGST Rules: Notification No 01/2021 CT

dated 01-01-2021:
Blocking of GSTR-1 when GSTR-3B not filed:
Rule 59 of the CGST Rules has been amended to insert sub-rule (6) which
provides as follows:
➢ a registered person shall not be allowed to furnish the details of outward
supplies of goods or services or both under section 37 in FORM GSTR-
1, if he has not furnished the return in FORM GSTR-3B for preceding
two months;
➢ a registered person, required to furnish return for every quarter under
the QRMP Scheme, shall not be allowed to furnish the details of
outward supplies of goods or services or both under section 37 in FORM
GSTR-1 or using the invoice furnishing facility, if he has not furnished
the return in FORM GSTR-3B for preceding tax period;
➢ a registered person, who is restricted from using the amount available
in electronic credit ledger to discharge his liability towards tax in excess
of ninety-nine per cent of such tax liability under rule 86B, shall not be
allowed to furnish the details of outward supplies of goods or services
or both under section 37 in FORM GSTR-1 or using the invoice
furnishing facility, if he has not furnished the return in FORM GSTR-
3B for preceding tax period.

2|P a ge ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

The CBIC vide Notification No. 02/2021 – Central Tax, dated January
12, 2021 amended Notification No. 2/2017-Central Tax, dated June 19, 2017
which talks about appointment of Commissioners of central tax and their
powers vested under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act”),
in following manner:

In Table I– Jurisdiction of Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner

of Central Tax in terms of Principal Commissioners/Commissioners of Central
Tax, Commissioners of Central Tax (Appeals), Additional Commissioner or
Joint Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals) and Commissioners of Central
Tax (Audit):

➢ Substituted the jurisdiction of the Principal Chief Commissioner, Delhi

vested over ‘Commissioner (Appeals II) Delhi and Additional
Commissioner or Joint Commissioner (Appeals II) Delhi’ to
‘Commissioner (Appeals I) Delhi and Additional Commissioner
(Appeals II) Delhi’
➢ Substituted the jurisdiction of the Principal Chief Commissioner,
Mumbai vested over ‘Commissioner (Appeals I) Mumbai and Additional
Commissioner or Joint Commissioner (Appeals I) Mumbai’ to
‘Commissioner (Appeals II) Mumbai and Additional Commissioner
(Appeals I) Mumbai’

In Table III- Jurisdiction of Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals) and

Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals)

➢ Inserted a note that, the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals I) Delhi,

shall have jurisdiction in terms of Principal Commissioner over Delhi I
(Delhi North, Delhi East) and Delhi II (Delhi South, Delhi West).
➢ Further, inserted another note that, the Commissioner (Appeals II)
Mumbai, shall have jurisdiction in terms of Principal Commissioner
over Mumbai I (Mumbai South) and Mumbai II (Mumbai East, Mumbai
Central).

3|P a ge ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

Module wise new functionalities deployed on the GST Portal
for taxpayers.
Various new functionalities are implemented on the GST Portal, from time to
time, for GST stakeholders. These functionalities pertain to different modules
such as Registration, Returns, Advance Ruling, Payment, Refund and other
miscellaneous topics. Various webinars are also conducted as well
informational videos prepared on these functionalities and posted on GSTNs
dedicated YouTube channel for the benefit of the stakeholders.

To view module wise functionalities deployed on the GST Portal and webinars
conducted/ Videos posted on our YouTube channel, refer to table below:

Aadhaar Authentication / e-KYC for Existing Taxpayers on

GST Portal

Functionality for Aadhaar Authentication and e-KYC where Aadhaar is not

available, has been deployed on GST Common Portal w.e.f. 6th January,
2021, for existing taxpayers. All taxpayers registered as Regular Taxpayers
(including Casual Taxable person, SEZ Units/Developers), ISD and
Composition taxpayers can do their Aadhaar Authentication or e-KYC on GST
Portal. This is not applicable for Government Departments, Public Sector
Undertakings, Local Authorities and Statutory Bodies.

4|P a ge ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

What is Aadhaar Authentication or e-KYC

a) If Aadhaar is available, the Primary Authorized signatory and 1 person who

is Proprietor/Partner/Director /Managing Partner/ Karta of the entity
registered can go for the Aadhaar Authentication.

b) In absence of Aadhaar, they can upload any of the following documents to

undergo e-KYC:

•Aadhaar Enrolment Number

•Passport
•EPIC (Voter ID Card)
•KYC Form
•Certificate issued by Competent Authority
•Others

How to do Aadhar Authentication/ e-KYC on Portal

a) When an existing registered taxpayer would login, a pop-up with Question

will be shown “Would you like to authenticate Aadhaar of the
Partner/Promotor and Primary Authorized Signatory “with the two options
“Yes, navigate to My Profile” and “Remind me later”.

b) If taxpayer clicks on “Remind me later” pop up will be closed and user can
navigate anywhere on the GST portal.

c) If taxpayer clicks on “Yes, Navigate to My Profile”, system will navigate to

My Profile. In MY PROFILE, a new tab “Aadhaar Authentication status” has
been shown from where link for Aadhaar Authentication to the Primary
Authorized Signatory and one of promoters/partners as selected by him will
be sent.

Note: If same person is Primary Authorized Signatory and Partner/Promoter,

Aadhaar authentication is only required to be done for that person.

d) On the My profile page, in addition to SEND AADHAAR AUTHENTICATION

LINK, UPLOAD E-KYC DOCUMENTS option would also be displayed to
taxpayer from where they can upload the e-KYC documents on Portal. In this
case, the process of e-KYC authentication would be subject to approval of
uploaded e-KYC documents by Tax Official.

Invoice Furnishing Facility (IFF) for Taxpayers under QRMP

Scheme

An Invoice Furnishing Facility (IFF) facility has been provided to taxpayers

under QRMP Scheme (Quarterly filers of Form GSTR-1 and also of Form
GSTR-3B returns), as per sub-rule (2) of Rule-59 of the CGST Rules, 2017.

5|P a ge ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

Taxpayers who have opted for quarterly filing frequency under the scheme
can file their details of outward supplies (B2B invoices only) for first two
months of a quarter (M1 and M2 respectively of a Quarter) in IFF. For e.g. for
Apr-June qtr., B2B invoices only for the months of April (M1) and May (M2)
can be filed in IFF by a taxpayer.

The IFF is a facility similar to Form GSTR-1, and it allows filing of details of
B2B invoices in following tables only:

a.4A, 4B, 4C, 6B, 6C - B2B Invoices

b.9B - Credit / Debit Notes (Registered) - CDNR
c.9A - Amended B2B Invoice - B2BA
d.9C - Amended Credit/ Debit Notes (Registered) – CDNRA

The option to upload details in IFF can be availed till 13th of the subsequent
month. Any invoices remaining to be furnished, can be filed using the IFF in
the subsequent month IFF or in the quarterly Form GSTR-1. For e.g. for Apr-
June qtr., B2B invoices for the month of April (M1) can be filed in IFF by a
taxpayer till 13th May. Any IFF which is not filed till the due date of 13th of
the subsequent month will expire.

To file the IFF form for M1 and M2 of the month, login to GST Portal and
navigate to Returns > Services > Returns Dashboard > File Returns and then
Select the Financial Year & Return Filing Period (M1/M2 of a quarter) and
click on SEARCH button to file the IFF forms for M1 or M2 month.

IFF is an optional facility provided to taxpayers under QRMP scheme to pass

on Input Tax Credit (ITC) to their recipients for M1 and M2 months of a
quarter. However, filing of Form GSTR-1 for M3 month of a quarter is
mandatory.
a. Records uploaded in IFF by the Supplier will reflect in Form
GSTR-2A/2B of the Recipient.
b. Supplier Taxpayers can also upload details in their IFF,
through JSON file, generated using Returns Offline Tool.
c. Records filed in IFF need not be filed again in Form GSTR-1 of
that quarter.
d. Only the details saved in IFF can be deleted/edited using
RESET button. Once submitted or filed, these details can’t be
deleted.

Accounting and Billing Software provided free of cost to all

taxpayers below 1.5 cr turnover:

GSTN has partnered with empanelled companies to provide free of cost

Accounting and Billing software for taxpayers with turnover below Rs 1.5
crores. The final list of the empanelled companies is available on the GSTN
website at the following link.

6|P a ge ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

 https://www.gstn.org.in/empaneled-companies

7|P a ge ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

CBIC Circulars:
CBIC bars Tax Officers from attending any Webinars
organized by non Govt entities

The CBIC has issued an instruction on 12th January 2021 on the subject of
its officers attending conferences/seminars/webinars/ organized by non-
government entities as resource persons.

As per the said instruction, no officer shall be allowed to attend

conferences/seminars/webinars organized by non-government entites,
without the prior permission of the Secretary, Department of Revenue,
Ministry of Finance, unless it is organized by government agencies.

This instruction is for strict compliance of all officers without any exception.

Karnataka Commercial Tax Department

releases GST Audit Manual
The KGST Audit Manual has been prepared by the Karnataka Commercial
Tax Department which will be a guide to the officers in implementing the law.

The Commercial Tax Department in association with the NIC, Karnataka has
also implemented an online audit backed system called e-shodane.

The Karnataka GST Audit Manual is available on the website of the

Commercial Tax Department at www.gst.kar.nic.in

8|P a ge ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

Bombay High Court remarks on anticipatory bail which is not ordinarily
permissible – White collar offences are more serious than offences like
murder, dacoity etc. – Granting of anticipatory bail hampers
investigation and such approach causes damage to the image of the
judiciary - Imposes costs on the petitioner

In the case of the Criminal Writ Petitions filed by Mr Tejas Praveen Dugad,
Mr Gaurav Pramod Dugad, Miss Sonal Paras Chordiya and Mr Kirtikumar
Manikchand Dugad vs UOI & DGG & others, reported in 2021-TIOL-178-
HC-MUM-GST, petitioners are directors of M/s. Ganraj Ispat Private Limited
company and the company is registered under the provisions of the Act, 2017
- One Tushar Munot, sole proprietor of M/s. Rutu Enterprises was arrested
by the officers of GST intelligence in the month of October 2020 - In the month
of November 2020, search of the premises of the company of Petitioners was
conducted and some documents came to be seized - It is the contention of the
Petitioners that as there was allegations of commission of offence under
section 132 of the Act and it was informed to them that there was GST
liabilities of Rs. 84,00,046/- - the Petitioner deposited this amount with
Respondent No. 2, but under protest - It is the contention of the Petitioners
that all the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure need to be applied
for registration of crime, investigation and for taking cognizance of the offence
and as the procedure is not followed, action taken against them is illegal -
Inasmuch it is their contention that the provisions of Sections 154, 157 and
172 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are not followed by the Respondents.
The Hon’ble High Court held that the criminal proceeding can be filed by the
Respondent department but such proceeding is not in existence at present
and from that angle, the petitions are premature - Provisions of 67, 67(10),
69, 132, 134, 138 and scheme of the Act show that separate Chapters are
given in the Act for determination of tax not paid or erroneously refunded or
input tax credit wrongly availed and for offences and penalties - In view of the
scheme of the Act, this Court has no hesitation to hold that in the cases of
present nature, both adjudication and prosecution can be started
simultaneously - Further, the aforesaid special provisions shall prevail over
the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and it cannot be said that
all the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure like Sections 154 and 173
of the Code of Criminal Procedure need to be followed for prosecution under
the Act - This Court is limiting the scope of discussion only to the extent of
the offences committed under the Act and the observations are made only

9|P a ge ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

from that angle - If offences under the Indian Penal Code also are committed
then different and more serious view can be taken - It needs to be kept in
mind that the allegations make out the case of forgery - The aforesaid
circumstances and position of law are sufficient for dismissal of all the
proceedings - Respondent department was virtually prevented from exercising
its powers even like issuing summons - By such Interim order, the Petitioners
indirectly got relief of anticipatory bail, which is also not ordinarily permissible
in proceeding of present nature - White collar offences are more serious than
offences like murder, dacoity etc. - Such offences are committed after
hatching conspiracy - This circumstance needs to be kept in mind by Court
as the granting of relief of anticipatory bail hampers investigation and such
approach causes damage to the image of judiciary - All the petitions stand
dismissed; In each petition, the Petitioner to deposit Rs.25,000/- as costs of
the petition and the amount is to be deposited in this Court within four weeks:
High Court

2) Cross empowerment of the Central and State GST authorities – Delhi

High Court throws light on the issue.

In the writ petition filed by M/s RCI Industries and Technologies Ltd,
reported in 2021-TIOL-138-HC-DELHI-GST, the action of search carried out
at the Petitioner's business premises on 30th September, 2020, u/s 67 of the
Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 139 of the
DGST Rules, 2017 was impugned - Petitioner complains that they have been
subjected to harassment at the hands of CGST Authorities i.e. DGGI
Gurugram who have searched them numerous times; that in fact Petitioner
has responded to the summons issued in this regard, pursuant whereto
statement of Petitioner company's director was also recorded; that the last
search was conducted by the CGST authorities on 7th March, 2020 at the
director's residence and this search action was challenged by the petitioner
in W.P. (C) No. 7145/2020 = 2020-TIOL-903-HC-P&H-GST before the Punjab
and Haryana High Court; that the said challenge was successful and
consequently the search action and the panchnama dated 7th March, 2020
were quashed - Petitioner's grievance is that now the State GST Authority i.e.
DGST has subjected the Petitioner to yet another search action in relation to
the same period, despite the Petitioner being earlier subjected to search action
at the hands of the Central Authorities, which was impugned before the
Punjab and Haryana High Court - It is argued that the action of the State
authorities under the DGST Act is illegal and unlawful and contrary to the
provisions of the CGST/DGST Act - Petitioner urges that no parallel enquiries
on the same issues by the two authorities can take place under Sections 5
and 6 of DGST Act, 2017 .
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court disposed off the writ petition as follows:-
+ In the event the notice issued by the DGST authorities pertains to a period
which is covered by the investigation carried out by the Central GST

10 | P a g e ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

authorities, the Petitioner can take recourse to the appropriate remedies in
that regard.
+ Since contentions have been raised with respect to the cross-empowerment
of the Central and the State authorities and it is asserted that there are no
guidelines prescribed under the Act or the Rules, it would be profitable to
throw some light on the issue - Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs
letter dated 5th October, 2018 has clarified on the issue - Further clarity on
the issue of cross-empowerment of State GST and Central GST officers is also
visible in a recent letter issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and
Customs being No. CBEC-20/10/07/2019-GST dated 22th June, 2020
wherein it was held that the power of Cross- empowerment under section 6(1)
of the CGST Act is absolute and not conditional.
+ It is thus apparent that if an officer of the Central GST initiates intelligence-
based enforcement action against a taxpayer administratively assigned to
State GST, the officers of the former would not transfer the said case to their
counterparts in the latter department and they would themselves take the
case to its logical conclusion.
+ Respondents would be bound by the aforenoted circulars and in case, the
action of the State and Central Authorities is overlapping, the Petitioner would
be at liberty to take action to impugn the same in accordance with law.
+ There is no panchnama on record. The only relevant section is Section 70,
which does not entail signatures of witnesses. Be that as it may,
determination of tax liability, has to be in accordance within the confines of
statutory provisions of the GST laws.
+ There is no merit in the contention of the Petitioner that absence of the
signature of the authorised person on Form GST INS-01 would render the
search action to be non-est . Petitioner does not dispute that the persons who
carried out the search were indeed those whose names has been mentioned
in the said authorisation, and they had displayed their identity cards at the
time of search.
+ It is also not the case of the Petitioner that the officers who carried out the
search did not properly discharge their official duty or otherwise acted in
furtherance of some extraneous purpose. The absence of signatures does not
manifest an absence of delegation of power in favour of the team which
conducted the search action. Further, the provisions of DVAT Act quoted in
the documents also cannot render the proceedings as illegal. The erstwhile
Act is saved by the repeal and saving provisions of the DGST Act, 2017 (
Vianaar Homes Private Limited = 2020-TIOL-520-HC-DEL-ST refers]
+ While exercising writ jurisdiction, Bench cannot adjudge or test the
adequacy and sufficiency of the grounds. Bench can only go into the question
and examine the formation of the belief to satisfy if the conditions specified
under the statutory provision invoked are met.
+ The Courts can interfere and hold the exercise of power to be bad in law
only if the grounds on which reason to believe is founded have no rational

11 | P a g e ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

connection between the information or material recorded; or are non-existent;
or are such on which no reasonable person can come to that belief.
+ The reasons to believe shown to the Bench demonstrate that the Appropriate
authority had the reasons, as per mandate of Section 67(2) of the DGST Act
along with relevant Rules, for formation of belief to carry out the search.
+ It cannot be said that there is no application of mind while issuing search
warrant. Thus, Bench would not like to countermand the action taken against
the Petitioner.

3) Condonation of delay applications by the Government departments –

the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court deprecates the practice of
authorities coming before this Court after inordinate delays assuming as
if the Law of Limitation does not apply to them – imposes costs on
officers of NCB.

In the SLP filed by Narcotics Control Bureau Regional Unit Jodhpur vs

Nepal Singh Meena & Ors, reported in 2021-TIOL-03-SC-NDPS-LB, a bail
order passed in NDPS matter is sought to be assailed on the ground that the
High Court failed to consider the mandatory requirements of Section 37 of the
NDPS Act. The order of bail was passed on 10.07.2019 and the appeal has
been filed after a delay of 405 days.

The Apex Court dismissed the SLP on grounds of delay and held that the
explanation given is hardly satisfactory and, in fact, is a saga of gross
negligence on the part of the concerned officers for prosecuting the remedy.
The dates set out in the application show that on 09.08.2019, a proposal to
file the special leave petition was sent by the zone to the NCB Headquarters
and the Headquarters asked for additional documents on 19.09.2019.
Thereafter, the documents were received on 14.10.2019 and a meeting was
held on 17.02.2020. The saga continues of these delays!
We have been repeatedly deprecating the practice of authorities coming before
this Court after inordinate delays assuming as if the Law of Limitation does
not apply to them. Repeatedly, reliance is placed on the judgments of vintage
when technology was not easily available. No reference is made to the
subsequent judgment in the Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. v.
Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. -(2012) 3 SCC 563 = 2012-TIOL-123-SC-
LMT which has dealt with the issue that consideration of the ability of the
Government to file appeal in time would have to be dealt with in the context
of the technology now available and merely shuffling files from one table to
the other would no more be a sufficient reason.
We have also categorized such cases as "certificate cases". We have specified
the object to file such cases to obtain a certificate of dismissal from the
Supreme Court to put a quietus to the issue and thus, record that nothing
could be done because the highest Court has dismissed the appeal. It is a
completion of formality with endeavourer to save the skin of the officers who

12 | P a g e ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

may be in default in following the appropriate legal process in time. The irony
is that despite our repeated orders, very little is done at least in taking action
against concerned officers who sit on files and do nothing. The presumption
is as if this Court will condone the delay for the asking. We refuse to follow
such a course.
We have been imposing costs for wasting judicial time in such matters which
are filed with this oblique motive of saving the officers. We thus, consider
appropriate to follow the same course of action in the present case and impose
costs of Rs.25,000/- on the petitioner to be recovered from the officers
concerned. The cost be deposited in Supreme Court Advocates on Record
Welfare Fund within four weeks along with the certificate of recovery from the
officers concerned.
A copy of the order be placed before the Director General, NCB for remedial
action as many cases of this kind are coming and as informed by the learned
ASG there were four other cases apart from one more case before us today
itself. We also make it clear to the Director General that non-compliance of
our aforesaid direction would invite consequential proceedings against the
Director General.

13 | P a g e ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

 Important Dates:

GSTR 3B (January 2021) 20th Feb 2021

GSTR 3B (Jan-Mar 2021) 22nd & 24th April 2021
CMP-08 (Jan-Mar 2021) 18th April 2021
GSTR 1(Jan-Mar 2021) 13th April 2021
Follow our
Monthly GSTR 1 (Jan 2021) 11th Feb 2021
Newsletter GSTR 5 (Jan 2021) 20th Feb 2021
GSTR 6 (Jan 2021) 13th Feb 2021
You c an ret riev e GSTR 7 (Jan 2021) 10th Feb 2021
the new slett er f or GSTR 8 (Jan 2021) 10th Feb 2021
the Sept em ber GSTR 9 (2019-2020) 28th Feb 2021
2018 onw ards GSTR 9C (2019-2020) 28th Feb 2021
from t his arc hiv e

ht t p:/ / gs tk arnat ak
a. gov .in/ m ont hne
ws . ht m

The GST Conspectus Issue February 2021

Office of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Central Tax (GST)

Bengaluru
. Editorial Team
Central Revenue Building A rch a n a N a ya k, Jo i n t C o m mi s si o n e r
N i rma l Jo y, D e p u t y C o m mi ssi o n e r
# 1, Queen’s Road, Bengaluru
Karnataka- 560001 C o n t e n t R e se a rch e rs
Website: http://gstkarnataka.gov.in/ S a b ri n a C a n o , S u p e ri n t e n d e n t
M. C h o k ka l i n g a m, S u p e r i n t e n d e n t
Mail Us: :gstcell-blr@gov.in
B i j u T h a mp i , S u p e ri n t e n d e n t

Disclaimer: The information, content, data etc. provided in this newsletter is for general
information purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for specific legal advice or
research. Users are advised to not solely rely on the content available in this newsletter and to
undertake their own independent due diligence. Users are advised to visit the official website of the
Ministry of Finance, Government of India for latest updates on GST related laws, rules and
regulations etc.

14 | P a g e ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021

15 | P a g e ©PCCO CT- BZ The GS T C onsp ec tus February 2021