GST - Single Authority - Ram Tirath was right after all

By Vijay Kumar

IN DDT 2887 13 07 2016, I wrote

In the CBEC's Outreach Programme at Hyderabad on Monday, CBEC Member, Ram Tirath stated that assessees under the GST will have to deal with only one single authority. The fear of dual control by the State Government and the Central Government on same issues has been haunting the trade ever since GST appeared on the horizon.

Will there be a single authority for registration, SCN, adjudication, appeal, audit, investigation, summons, assessment, returns, refund and other formalities? Or will there be double trouble with both the State and Central GST authorities breathing down the necks of harried assessees?

In such a situation, the announcement by the CBEC Member is a welcome breeze of oxygen, but unfortunately he didn't elaborate. I tried to contact him and Mr. Upender Gupta, Commissioner, GST to find out if there would be really only one authority for all the above purposes, by phone, mail and SMS, but couldn't succeed.

In DDT 2891 19 07 2016, I wrote:

DDT 2887 13 07 2016 reported about CBEC Member Ram Tirath's statement in Hyderabad on 11.7.2016 that assessees under the GST will have to deal with only one single authority. Board has neither confirmed, reiterated or denied this. They have gone into a silent mode. The silence is broken with a thud by the Revenue Secretary loudly and emphatically proclaiming that it will be dual control and it's good for you according to him.

In an article published in the edit page of the Hindu today, Revenue Secretary Hasmukh Adhia and Chief Economic Advisor Arvind Subramanian glorify the dual control as:

GST would improve - even substantially - tax governance in two ways. The first relates to the self-policing incentive inherent to a valued-added tax.

The second relates to the dual monitoring structure of the GST - one by the States and one by the Centre. Critics and taxpayers have viewed the dual structure with some anxiety, fearing two sources of interface with the tax department and hence two potential sources of harassment. But dual monitoring should also be viewed as creating desirable tax competition and cooperation between State and Central authorities. Even if one set of tax authorities overlooks and/or fails to detect evasion, there is the possibility that the other overseeing authority may not.

There seems to be no clarity even within the Revenue Department with the CBEC Member and the Revenue Secretary, not on the same page on single or dual control. It is this kind of dual confusion, which makes GST look like a monstrous devil.

Now the Revenue Secretary has taken a U-Turn. Addressing the media last week, he said, “one thing is very sure; there cannot be a dual control.”

http://www.tubechop.com/watch/8242767

Speaking to Doordarshan yesterday, Mr. Adhia said, "The states are very correct when they say we do not want small traders to be under the burden of a dual control. Certainly, it is a desirable objective that we should avoid dual control. It is not a good idea that a small trader is under the scrutiny of both the State and the Centre and they get a separate notice from the Central Government as well as the State Government and they comply with two different authorities. They file two different appeals in case if they lose. So this is not desirable. Yes, dual control is certainly not desirable."

So, Mr. Ram Tirath, the CBEC Member was correct in the first place, though he was not available to confirm it. If the Revenue Secretary does not change his opinion, we may not have dual control - but multiple confusion is assured.