☐ For GSTPs, has Rule 83 enrolment been completed? ☐ For CA / CMA / CS / advocate, has direct eligibility been verified? ☐ For other categories, has GSTP examination been passed? ☐ For taxpayers, has GSTP eligibility been verified? ☐ Has…
48
☐ For GSTPs, has Rule 83 enrolment been completed? ☐ For CA / CMA / CS / advocate, has direct eligibility been verified? ☐ For other categories, has GSTP examination been passed? ☐ For taxpayers, has GSTP eligibility been verified? ☐ Has…
Section 48 GSTP framework — checklist (19 items)
Section 48 GSTP framework — checklist (19 items)
☐ For GSTPs, has Rule 83 enrolment been completed?
☐ For CA / CMA / CS / advocate, has direct eligibility been verified?
☐ For other categories, has GSTP examination been passed?
☐ For taxpayers, has GSTP eligibility been verified?
☐ Has formal authorisation through PCT-05 been done?
☐ Has substantive review of GSTP-prepared filings been done?
☐ Has filing been authorised through PCT-05?
☐ For withdrawal, has PCT-06 been used?
☐ Has documentary trail been preserved?
☐ Has Bharti Airtel substance-over-form discipline been applied?
☐ Has sub-s. (3) responsibility framework been understood?
☐ For GSTP removal, has Mafatlal procedural-fairness been applied?
☐ Has Vatika prospective-operation been applied?
☐ Has Mohit Minerals constitutional framework been applied?
☐ Has Whirlpool framework been considered for disputes?
☐ Has coordination with broader compliance framework been done?
☐ For incorrect filings, has sub-s. (3) responsibility been observed?
☐ Has Maneka Gandhi procedural-fairness been applied?
☐ Has the file been reviewed for audit-defensibility?
Worked examples — five live scenarios
Example 1 — CA-GSTP engagement
Facts: Taxpayer engages CA as GSTP for FY 2025-26 compliance.
Analysis: Rule 83(b)(iv) — CA direct eligibility. PCT-05 authorisation. Taxpayer retains sub-s. (3) substantive responsibility. Standard framework operative.
Result: Compliant engagement framework.
Example 2 — Substantive responsibility for incorrect filing
Facts: GSTP filed GSTR-3B with incorrect ITC claim. Department initiates s. 73 framework.
Analysis: Sub-s. (3) — taxpayer retains responsibility. Cannot shift liability to GSTP. Practitioner advice — taxpayer's substantive review essential; documentary trail of review.
Result: Sub-s. (3) framework operative.
Example 3 — GSTP removal proceedings
Facts: GSTP faces removal proceedings for misconduct.
Analysis: Rule 84 — PCT-03 SCN + PCT-04 removal order. Mafatlal procedural-fairness framework anchors. Practitioner defence — substantive merits + procedural compliance.
Result: Procedural-fairness defence framework.
Example 4 — Direct-eligibility CA framework
Facts: CA wants to register as GSTP.
Analysis: Rule 83(b)(iv) — direct eligibility. PCT-01 application. No GSTP examination required. Standard enrolment.
Result: Direct-eligibility framework.
Example 5 — Non-CA practitioner GSTP examination
Facts: Commerce graduate wants to register as GSTP.
Analysis: Rule 83(b)(v) category. GSTP examination conducted by NACIN required. After passing, PCT-01 enrolment.
Result: Examination pathway framework.
Planning and litigation strategy
Litigation defence
Cross-references