2023 (12) TMI 513 - HC - GST

Tax Dealer Wins Right to Rectify GSTR-3B Form Errors, Enabling Input Tax Credit Classification Correction

CHUKKATH KRISHNAN PRAVEEN Versus STATE OF KERALA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TAX PAYER SERVICES DIVISION - WADAKKANCHERY, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR, STATE TAX OFFICER, ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS

Kerala HC allowed a tax dealer's petition to rectify GSTR-3B form mistakes, permitting correction of input tax credit classification between IGST, SGST, ... Rectification of mistake in Form GSTR-3B by accounting input tax credit as IGST instead of SGST and CGST credit - permission to petitioner to refund IGST Input tax credit and thereafter, adjust the same towards SGST and CGST liability - reconsideration of Exhibit.P3 or P6 by considering evidences produced by petitioner, especially in the fact that, IGST credit and liability towards CGST and SGST are same - Exhibts.P3 and P6 are just and legal or not - seeking to dispense with the production of translation of vernacular documents. HELD THAT:- The present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P4 and Ext.P5 as a rectification application filed by the petitioner/assessee and pass necessary orders expeditiously in accordance with the law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Issues involved: The issues involved in the judgment are related to rectification of mistakes in Form GSTR-3B, refund of IGST Input tax credit, reconsideration of assessment orders, and quashing of unjust and illegal orders.Rectification of mistakes in Form GSTR-3B: The petitioner, a registered dealer under the provisions of the KVAT Act and now under the provisions of the CGST/SGST Act, filed a writ petition seeking permission to rectify the mistake in Form GSTR-3B by accounting input tax credit as IGST instead of SGST and CGST credit. The petitioner submitted that errors were made in submitting the returns, leading to the passing of the assessment order. The petitioner made a representation for rectifying the mistakes, which the court directed the 3rd respondent to consider as a rectification application and pass necessary orders expeditiously after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.Refund of IGST Input tax credit: The petitioner also sought permission to refund IGST Input tax credit and adjust the same towards SGST and CGST liability. The learned Government Pleader did not object to this prayer, and the court disposed of the petition with a direction to consider the rectification application and pass necessary orders within a period of two months.Reconsideration of assessment orders: Additionally, the petitioner requested the court to direct the respondents to reconsider Exhibit.P3 or P6 by taking into account the evidences produced, especially highlighting that IGST credit and liability towards CGST and SGST are the same. The court did not specifically address this prayer in the judgment but directed the 3rd respondent to consider the rectification application and pass necessary orders expeditiously.Quashing of unjust and illegal orders: The petitioner also sought a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ to quash Exhibits.P3 and P6 as unjust and illegal. The judgment did not explicitly address this prayer, as the focus was on the rectification application and passing necessary orders expeditiously.In conclusion, the High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the 3rd respondent to consider the rectification application filed by the petitioner and pass necessary orders expeditiously within a period of two months, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.