Private company to file representations for GST Ledger unblocking within 6 weeks

The Court directed the petitioner, a private limited company, to file representations with the new jurisdictional officer within six weeks for unblocking the Electronic Ledger under GST Rules. The officer was instructed to consider the representations promptly, ensuring a timeframe for resolution without delving into the case's merits.

---

---

Issues:
1. Representation for unblocking Electronic Ledger under GST Rules.
2. Validity of blocking Electronic Ledger without reasons recorded.
3. Change in jurisdictional officer due to change in registered address.
4. Timeframe for consideration of representations.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, a private limited company registered with GST Authorities in Karnataka, filed a writ petition seeking direction for the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to consider representations and unblock the Electronic Ledger. The petitioner had filed Returns in GSTR-3B for March 2019 with late fee. Subsequently, the petitioner was advised to deposit belatedly availed credit amount with interest due to Section 16[4] of the CGST Act 2017. Despite filing representations, the Electronic Ledger remained blocked.

2. The petitioner's counsel argued that the Electronic Ledger could only be blocked under Rule 86A of the GST Rules with reasons recorded in writing. However, the email blocking the ledger did not provide any reasons. The petitioner contended that availing Input Credit belatedly with late fee payment is permissible under the GST Act. The respondent was urged to consider the representations made by the petitioner.

3. The Additional Government Advocate mentioned that the petitioner's representations were submitted recently, and a reasonable time should be granted for consideration. Due to a change in the registered address, the jurisdictional officer was now the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes - LGSTO - 20 Bengaluru-9. The petitioner was advised to provide a representation to this officer for expedited consideration.

4. The Court, without delving into the merits of the case, directed the petitioner to file representations with the new jurisdictional officer within six weeks. The officer was instructed to promptly consider the representations enclosed with a copy of the Court's order. The writ petition was disposed of based on this directive, ensuring a timeframe for the resolution of the issue.

---