Electronic filing of service tax returns is mandatory, so a manual return need not be accepted and writ relief was refused.

Rule 7(3) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 made half-yearly service tax returns mandatory in electronic form from 1 October 2011, and a manual return could not be demanded as of right once that mode was prescribed. The assessee had otherwise been filing electronically and showed no technical inability to comply. In these circumstances, the Kerala HC held that refusal to accept the manual return did not call for interference under Article 226, and relief was not warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether a half-yearly service tax return for the relevant period could be accepted in manual form despite the requirement of electronic filing, and whether the refusal to accept such manual return warranted interference in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: Section 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 requires a service tax assessee to furnish returns in the prescribed form and manner. Rule 7 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 prescribes the half-yearly return in Form ST-3 or ST-3A, and Rule 7(3), introduced with effect from 1 October 2011, specifically mandates that the half-yearly return shall be submitted electronically. The language of the rule was treated as mandatory, leaving no room for a manual return after the introduction of electronic filing. The appellant had itself been filing returns electronically except for the return in question, and no case of technical inability to comply was shown. In these circumstances, interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was held to be unwarranted.

Conclusion: The manual return was not required to be accepted, and the refusal to grant relief was upheld against the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the prescribed tax-return rule makes electronic filing mandatory, a manual return cannot be insisted upon as a matter of right, and writ jurisdiction will not be exercised to compel acceptance of a return filed contrary to the statutory mode.

---