ANNEXURE-VII

Form GST -
[See Rule ]
Application for Amendment(s) in Particulars subsequent to Registration under Goods&
Services Act Year

(This form would be used to amend fields mentioned in para 7.2(7) of the Process document as
all other fields can be amended on self-service basis)

I GSTIN

II Full Name of Dealer

III Amendment summary

(Please put field reference in which amendments are sought, date of amendment and reason for amendment(s).
attach additional sheets if required)
Field Field Name Date Reason(s)
Ref. (mm/dd/yy)

(Please edit /fill in only those following fields that are to be amended)

Complete Registration form should be copied here.

Facilities for uploading scanned documents including photographs (only in .jpg format) etc. needs to be
provided.

1
 ANNEXURE-VIII

EXTRACT OF THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE PROBLEM OF DUAL

CONTROL, THRESHOLD AND EXEMPTIONS IN GST REGIME

Para 7. The matter was deliberated upon by the Committee. It was felt that the threshold, both for
SGST and CGST should be common except for North-eastern States where the threshold could be
prescribed at lower level. It was also felt by the Committee that the threshold both for services and
goods should be same. However, for inter-state dealers, the threshold should be zero. The threshold
should be worked out taking into account both the supply of goods and services on gross turnover
basis. Such turnover would include the turnover of exempted goods and services (including non-
taxable) and exports. It was also agreed that the turnover so calculated would be applicable for the
purposes of Threshold, Compounding Scheme and Dual Control. While the State representatives felt
that turnover should be State-wise of a legal entity, the representatives of Government of India
strongly felt that it should be All India turnover of a legal entity, otherwise it may lead to tax evasion.
It was pointed out by the Centre‟s representatives that if the turnover of an entity is considered State-
wise, the threshold for CGST would increase steeply when calculating the turnover of the entity on an
All India basis. This would adversely affect the revenue of theCentre.What would happen is that an
entity will open office in States and Union Territories (which are 37 in number) for availing of
State-wise threshold for SGST purposes. In such a scenario, the threshold for CGST purposes would
work out to Rs. 9.25 Crores (Rs. 25 Lacs * 37). Similar impact would be there for the compounding
scheme as well as for the issue relating to dual control.The suggestion of the Central Board of Excise
and Customs (CBEC) that legal entity on all India basis should be taken was considered by the
Committee and after due deliberations the suggestion was agreed to avoid tax evasion by the
manufacturers/traders/dealers.

48
 ANNEXURE-IX

EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES ON REFINEMENT TO THE PROCESS FOR STATES

OPTION FOR TWO-WAY API BASED INTEGRATION AND FLEXIBILITY (DECISION
DATED 18.04.2012 OF EC) WILL BE FORMULATED SEPARATELY

14. The Chairman, Empowered Committee asked the Member Secretary to indicate the
recommendations of the Committee regarding strategic control of the Government on GST Network.
The Member Secretary mentioned that a Committee of Principal Secretaries/Secretaries
(Finance/Taxation) and Commissioners of Commercial Taxes met on 10 th April, 2012 to discuss the
various concerns raised by the States regarding GSTN-SPV. Dr. Nandan Nilekani, Chairman, Unique
Indentification Authority of India and Chairman, Empowered Group on IT Infrastructure for GST
kindly agreed to join the discussion of the Committee. He, during the Committee meeting, clarified
the position why the Government of India, Empowered Committee and the Empowered Group on IT
Infrastructure for GST have recommended for setting up of a Non-profit Section 25 Private Company.
During the meeting, concerns were raised regarding flexibility to be provided to the States and the
strategic control of the Government on GSTN. After due deliberations, following recommendations
were made by the Committee for the consideration of the Empowered Committee:
(i) Following three options may be made available to the States for usage of services to be
provided by GSTN:
a. „Full service model‟ where the GSTN will offer the full range of GST services as a
utility which the States can utilize.
b. „Limited service model‟ where a State will use the GSTN for common registration,
return and payments and has its own software for remaining GST functions.
c. „Application Programming Interface (API) model‟ where the States will have their own
software for flexibility but will, adhere to the common registration, return and payment
formats defined by the GSTN (though they may collect additional data) and ensure that
the rights of both States and Centre are protected in terms of getting instantaneous
information and ensuring timely settlements of their respective share of taxes.
(ii) The Committee noted that the ownership of the private equity holders will be widely
dispersed and hence, the basic control would stay with the Government. The distinction
between ownership and control was also noted.
(iii) The Committee noted that the Empowered Committee had deliberated on the non-
Government status of the SPV in detail in its earlier meetings and taken a considered view
to approve it. However, Committee requested that the list of potential private equity
partners should be decided in consultation with the Empowered Committee.
(iv) The Committee noted that the mechanisms recommended by Empowered Group for
ensuring strategic control would be adequate. However, the draft Memorandum of
Association and Articles of Association incorporating necessary provisions should be
placed before the Empowered Committee for consultation before finalisation.
(v) To provide higher representations to the States, there should be an Advisory Committee of
the GSTN-SPV in which all the States should be represented.
49
 (vi) There should be an exit/sunset clause for dissolving the GSTN-SPV, if both the Centre and
the States decide to do so.
(vii) Any new developments during the process leading to the formation of GSTN SPV should
be brought to the notice of the Empowered Committee.

15. The Chairman, Empowered Committee broadly indicated that the strategic control over the
SPV will be available by virtue of thinly dispersed private shareholding, the composition of Board of
Directors, special resolutions, share holders agreement, induction of deputationists from the
Government and agreements between GSTN-SPV and Government, Advisory Committee of GSTN-
SPV etc. After due deliberations, the recommendations of the Committee mentioned in para 14 was
approved by the Empowered Committee.

16. It was also mentioned by the Member Secretary that during the meeting of the Hon‟ble Union
Finance Minister on17th April, 2012, the issue regarding finalizing the other details of the formation
of the GSTN-SPV came up for discussion. It was felt that the Empowered Group on IT Infrastructure
for GST, chaired by Dr. Nandan Nilekani, may also look into this aspect as well. The Empowered
Committee accordingly decided to endorse the same.

50
 ANNEXURE-X

EXTRACT OF THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON IGST AND GST ON IMPORTS

I. Norms for blacklisting of dealers for blocking tax credits

A system of “GST Compliance Rating” can be introduced. Any fall in the rating below a prescribed level
will have impact of blacklisting a dealer. The rating is only a measure to facilitate informed choices by the
purchasers and not a punishment measure. There should be clear declaration in the law that blacklisting does
not mean that ITC claim on other non-blacklisted dealers is assured by the Government as any eligibility for
ITC primarily depends on the selling dealer owning up the tax invoice and paying the due tax. However, if the
rating falls below the prescribed level resulting in that dealer becoming blacklisted, purchases from him will
no longer be eligible for ITC, on self-assessment basis, (they however will be eligible for availing the ITC only
after the tax has been paid by such selling dealers) by the buyers, till improvement of the rating to normal
level.

IX.A. Trigger for Blacklisting

i. Continuous default for 3 months in paying ITC that has been reversed.
ii. Continuous default of 3 months or any 3 month-period over duration of 12 months in uploading
sales details leading to reversal of ITC for others. Defaulters of even a single event should also be
flagged and put in public domain as being a potential black listed dealer so as to alert the buyers.
iii. Continuous short reporting of sales beyond a prescribed limit of 5% (of total sales) for a period of
6 months.

IX.B. Default

Not doing the activity within the prescribed cut off dates. A system of rating the dealers based on
their compliance should also be done and put in public domain to inform prospective buyers.

IX.C. Rating and Compliance Profile

There should also be a continuous rating system, provided under model law, for dealers based on
parameters such as promptness in e-return filing, discrepancies detected where the dealer has
had to make corrections, making prompt payment in lieu of reversed ITC, etc. The profiles for all
dealers would be posted in public domain so that the dealer community is kept aware of the
compliance profile of all registered dealers with whom they may have to deal with during the
course of their business. While the system of blacklisting may only highlight deviant behaviour
after it crosses a certain threshold, a system-updated dealer profile will serve as a continuing

51
 rating mechanism for the entire community and leaders within a certain industry can set a
benchmark for others to emulate.

IX.D. Blacklisting

i. Only for regulating ITC by others.

ii. Will be based on dealer rating. A dealer will be blacklisted if dealer rating falls below the
prescribed limit.
iii. To be put in public domain.
iv. To be notified (auto-SMS) to all dealers who have pre-registered this dealer (black listed now) as
their supplier.
v. To be prospective only (from month next to blacklisting)
vi. Blacklisted GSTINs cannot be uploaded in purchase details. Corresponding denial of ITC to be
supported by suitable provision in the law.
vii. ITC reversal in hands of the buyer should take place for disowning of any tax invoice with date
prior to effect of blacklisting of the seller.
viii. Once blacklisting is lifted, buyers can avail unclaimed ITC subject to this dealer uploading sales
details along with tax and interest.

52