TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Filing of returns
Section 39 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘Act’ for short) provides for filing of returns by the tax payers. Section 39(1) of the Act provides that every registered person, other than an Input Service Distributor or a non-resident taxable person or a person paying tax under the provisions of section 10 or section 51 or section 52 shall, for every calendar month or part thereof, furnish, a return, electronically, of inward and outward supplies of goods or services or both, input tax credit availed, tax payable, tax paid and such other particulars, in such form and manner, within such time, and subject to such conditions and restrictions, as may be prescribed.
Assessment of non-filers of returns
Section 62(1) of the Act provides that where a registered person fails to furnish the return under section 39 , even after the service of a notice, the proper officer may proceed to assess the tax liability of the said person to the best of his judgement taking into account all the relevant material which is available or which he has gathered and issue an assessment order within a period of 5 years from the date specified under section 44 for furnishing of the annual return for the financial year to which the tax not paid relates.
Section 62(2) of the Act provides that where the registered person furnishes a valid return within 60 days (before 01.10.2023 – 30 days) of the service of the assessment order, the said assessment order shall be deemed to have been withdrawn but the liability for payment of interest under sub-section (1) of section 50 or for payment of late fee under section 47 shall continue.
A proviso to Section 62(2) of the Act with effect from 01.10.2023, which provides that where the registered person fails to furnish a valid return within 60 days of the service of the assessment order, he may furnish the same within a further period of 60 days on payment of an additional late fee of Rs.100/- for each day of delay beyond 60 days of the service of the said assessment order and in case he furnishes valid return within such extended period, the said assessment order shall be deemed to have been withdrawn, but the liability to pay interest under sub-section (1) of section 50 or to pay late fee under section 47 shall continue.
Case laws
In Helmet House, Represented by its Proprietor Kumba Sundram Jeyaram Versus The Deputy State Tax Officer-1, Madurai - 2024 (9) TMI 391 - MADRAS HIGH COURT, the petitioner had filed the Returns in GSTR 01 on 25.03.2023 after the petitioner received a notice in GSTR 3A on the same date. In GSTR 01 the petitioner declined the difference in supply, however, the petitioner failed to file GSTR 3B in time. Therefore, based on the Returns filed by the petitioner in GSTR 01 on 25.03.2023, assessment order was passed under Section 62(1) of the TNGST Act, 2017 on 22.05.2023. The petitioner contended that with effect from 01.10.2023, the period was also extended, wherein, it has been extended to 60 days in terms of Finance Act No. 2023 dated 31.03.2023 with effect from 01.10.2023 vide Notification No.28/2023-Central Tax dated 31.07.2023. The Revenue contended that during the period in dispute, the above amendment was not in force and therefore, retrospective benefit cannot be given to the petitioner. The High Court considered the submissions of the petitioner and the Department also has taken into account the amendment brought in the Finance Act, 2023, the High Court inclined to conclude that the delay in filing the GSTR 3B Return on 02.07.2023 is liable to be condoned as a consequence of which the impugned assessment order passed under Section 62(1) dated 22.05.2023 is to be deemed to have been withdrawn.
In M/s. Brothers Engineering and Errectors Limited Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Amaravathi & The Deputy Commissioner ST, Special Circle, Vijayawada. - 2025 (8) TMI 1763 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT, on account of the non-filing of the returns in GSTR-3A Forms, the best judgment assessment order was passed for the month of February — 2023, on 01.04.2023 and the best judgment assessment order was passed for the months of March — 2023 to May — 2023, on 19.07.2023. The petitioner, after passing all these assessment orders, had filed GSTR-3B Forms and had also paid the necessary taxes, in relation to the month of February — 2023, on 09.08.2023 and in relation to the months of March — 2023 to May — 2023, on 13.09.2023. The High Court, following the wholesome principle set out by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, allowed the writ petition, declaring that the assessment orders, dated 01.04.2023 & 19.07.2023 passed for the months of February — 2023 and March — 2023 to May — 2023 are deemed to have been withdrawn. However, the liability of the petitioner to pay interest on account of the delayed payment of tax, if any, would not be absolved.
In Siva Electricals Versus The Assistant Commissioner State Tax, Kurnool, The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Union Of India. - 2026 (7) TMI 704 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT, the petitioner could not able to file GSTR – 3B within the stipulated date for January, 2023. The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order on the basis of best Judgment on 17.04.2023. He confirmed the demand of GST to the tune of Rs.12.01 lakhs along with interest. The Department initiated proceedings for recovery of the dues mentioned under the assessment orders specified above. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Petition.
The petitioner filed GSTR – 1 form on 11.05.2023 and filed GSTR – 3B on 29.05.2023 and paid tax along with the interest applicable. The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking to quash the proceedings of the department dated 17.04.2023 and demand of Rs.12,61,060/- towards GST along with interest on various grounds.
The petitioner contended that filed GSTR-3B return of January, 2023 within sixty days from the date of issuance of Assessment Order in question by paying the interest and late fee. The petitioner relied on the judgment in M/s. Brothers Engineering and Errectors Limited Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Amaravathi & The Deputy Commissioner ST, Special Circle, Vijayawada. - 2025 (8) TMI 1763 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT. The Department contended that the petitioner has not filed the return within the extended time as contemplated under Section 62(2) of Act, it is not entitled for the relief sought for.
The High Court observed that the petitioner failed to submit the return for January, 2023 within thirty days from the date of Assessment Order. However, subsequently it not only paid the tax liability but also paid late fee for the delay in payment of tax. It is also not disputed that while filing return for the month of January, 2023, interest was paid. The High Court, with reference to the decisions of AP High Court and Madras High Court in the above case laws held that the Assessment Order dated 17.04.2023 passed under Section 62 of CGST Act is deemed to have been withdrawn and no steps for recovery can be initiated or continued for recovery of the tax and dues raised under the aforesaid order of assessment.