Decoding GSTR-9 Table 6A1

-

Mastering ITC Reconciliation Across Financial Years

Understanding the Logic Behind Excluding Previous Year's ITC from Current Year's Return.

Reconciling Input Tax Credit (ITC) across financial years is one of the most complex tasks during the annual GST filing process. Table 6A1 of GSTR 9 is a newly emphasized mechanism designed to streamline this process by isolating previous year claims within the current annual return structure. This clarification details what Table 6A1 captures and how it impacts the overall ITC figures reported.

What is Table 6A1 and the Amount Reported?

Table 6A1 of GSTR 9 for FY 2024-25 serves a specific segregating function:

Inclusion Criterion:

Table 6A1 captures the ITC of preceding FY (2023-24) claimed by the recipient in the current FY (2024-25) till the specified time period and it is also included in Table 6A of GSTR 9 for FY 2024-25.

Exclusions and Calculation Impact

Exclusions from Table 6A1:

Importantly, any ITC pertaining to FY 2023-24 or any other preceding financial years, which has been reclaimed during current FY (2024-25) on account of rule 37 / 37A will not be reported in Table 6A1 of GSTR 9.

This segregation logic is vital for calculating the actual ITC pertaining to the current year (FY 2024-25):

Therefore, the amount calculated in Table 6A2 (6A minus 6A1) is the ITC pertaining to current FY (2024-25) which need to be bifurcated between 6B to 6H.

By effectively isolating the previous year's claim in Table 6A1, the system corrects a common reconciliation issue:

As the ITC of preceding FY (2023-24) has been excluded through Table 6A1 therefore it will not create the difference in Table 6J of GSTR 9 as the case was with GSTR-9 till FY 2023-24.

Professional Insight: Key Takeaway 💡

Table 6A1 simplifies the annual reconciliation for finance professionals. Its purpose is to filter out delayed prior-year claims, ensuring that the remaining calculated figure in Table 6A2 represents the true ITC for the current financial year that requires detailed breakup in Tables 6B to 6H. Taxpayers should ensure the manual entries for previous-year claims align precisely with the system's segregation to avoid reconciliation errors in Table 6J.

Source: Clarification based on GST Portal FAQs.

Statutory Reference: (Refer to Section 44 of the CGST Act, 2017, and relevant rules including Rule 37/37A.)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Partner Remuneration is Business Income: Expenses (Including Depreciation) Allowed

-
Image
Partner Remuneration is Business Income: Expenses (Including Depreciation) Allowed Delhi ITAT Confirms Section 28(v) Classification and Upholds Consistency Rule. The Delhi Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has provided critical clarity for partners of professional firms, confirming that remuneration received is classified as Business Income , not 'Salary'. This classification under Section 28(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 , allows the partner to claim legitimate business expenditures against that income. The Dispute: CA Partner's Expense Claim The case involved an assessee, a chartered accountant partner, who received remuneration/salary from his partnership firm (Assessment Year 2018-19). The dispute arose over the treatment of expenses: Assessee's Action: Claimed business-related expenses, including depreciation on a motor car, again...
Read more

Employee Cannot Be Penalized: TDS Credit Allowed Despite Employer's Default

-
Image
Delhi ITAT Upholds Tax Credit Based on Salary Slips, Overruling Form 26AS/Form 16 Denial. A recent ruling by the Delhi Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) delivers crucial relief to employees facing denial of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) credit due to non-compliance by their former employer. The Tribunal confirmed that the Revenue cannot deny tax credit to an employee if the employee can provide substantive evidence (like salary slips) showing that tax was actually deducted from their salary, regardless of the employer's failure to remit the tax or issue Form 16 . Background of the Dispute The Facts: The assessee (an ex-employee of TLPL) received gross salary and had TDS deducted under Section 192 . However, the employer neither provided Form 16 nor remitted the TDS amount to the government account. Disallowance: The assessee...
Read more

🏠 Section 54 Exemption: Investment in Spouse's Name is Valid, Rules ITAT

-
Image
Section 54 Exemption: Investment in Spouse's Name is Valid, Rules ITAT Ahmedabad Tribunal Remands Case for Ignoring High Court Precedents. A recurrent legal challenge under the Income-tax Act revolves around the validity of claiming capital gains exemption when the new residential property is purchased in the name of the assessee’s spouse. The Ahmedabad ITAT recently addressed this issue, reiterating a consistent judicial view and underscoring the necessity for tax authorities to consider binding High Court precedents. The Core Dispute and Disallowance The case (Assessment Year 2012-13) involved an assessee who sold a residential house and reinvested the sale proceeds in a new residential property, claiming exemption under Section 54 . Disallowance Rationale: The Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed the exemption solely on the...
Read more