Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Delhi High Court Examines GST Return Rectification Challenges: Section 39(9) Implications</h1> The Delhi High Court addressed issues related to rectification of returns under Section 39(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court ... Rectification of returns - Section 172 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Held that:- Petitioners pointed out that apart from the routine rectifications, other corrections such as inadvertent reflection of a mandatory GST registration form, as voluntary or vice versa, which can lead to serious consequences cannot be rectified in the existing format in the GST portal. Learned ASG submitted that on this aspect, instructions would have to be obtained. List on 18.02.2019. Issues: Rectification of returns under Section 39(9) and Section 37, cap on rectifications, extension of date for filing annual return, corrections beyond routine rectifications in GST portal.In the judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court, the primary issue addressed was regarding the rectification of returns under Section 39(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court noted that suitable amendments had been made in Section 39(9) to allow for at least two rectifications within a specified period. However, the petitioners argued that Section 39(9) is subject to Section 37, which does not impose any cap on rectifications. They highlighted the importance of Rules, specifically Rule 71 sub-rules (2) and (3), which suggest that rectifications can be made as necessary for dealers to correct mistakes, even beyond a month. The court opined that placing a quantitative cap over a specified period might not be permissible based on these provisions, and the Additional Solicitor General agreed to seek instructions on this matter.Secondly, the judgment addressed the extension of the date for filing annual returns to 31.03.2019 under Section 172 of the CGST Act, 2017. The court noted that this extension had been made in accordance with the Removal of Difficulties Order, 2018, rendering the issue moot. The petitioners raised concerns about corrections beyond routine rectifications, such as inadvertent misclassification of GST registration forms, which could have serious repercussions but could not be rectified through the existing format in the GST portal. The court acknowledged this issue, and the ASG agreed to obtain necessary instructions to address this matter.In conclusion, the court scheduled the next hearing for 18.02.2019 to further deliberate on the issues raised regarding rectifications, the absence of a cap on rectifications, the extension of the filing deadline for annual returns, and the need for corrections beyond routine rectifications in the GST portal. The judgment highlighted the importance of aligning statutory provisions with practical requirements to ensure effective implementation of the GST regime.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
