2024 (7) TMI 372 - HC - GST

Tax Officer's GSTR 3B Input Tax Credit Order Challenged, Writ Petition Dismissed with Appeal Rights Under Section 107

HC dismissed writ petition challenging tax officer's order regarding Input Tax Credit entry in GSTR 3B for April 2019. Court directed petitioner to file ... Wrong credit entry during the month of April, 2019 - It is submitted that the mistake was rectified by the petitioner in the returns filed by the petitioner in GSTR 3B for the month of May, 2019 - HELD THAT:- The petitioner may have a case for proper explanation before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017. Therefore, the Appellate Authority, namely, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Tirunelveli, is suo motu impleaded as third respondent. The petitioner is directed to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017 before the third respondent within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The third respondent shall consider and dispose of the appeal to be filed by the petitioner within such period without reference to the limitation on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 5 months thereafter. It is needless to state that the petitioner shall pre-deposit the amount as per Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017. Petition dismissed. Issues:Challenge to impugned order dated 31.01.2020 by State Tax Officer regarding wrong credit entry made by petitioner in GSTR 3B for the month of April 2019.Analysis:The petitioner challenged the impugned order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the State Tax Officer, which was based on a wrong credit entry made by the petitioner in the GSTR 3B for April 2019. The petitioner admitted to the mistake and rectified it in the returns filed for May 2019. The petitioner argued that the discrepancy was rectified as there was a sufficient balance of Input Tax Credit (ITC) of IGST during May 2019, fully discharging the tax liability for April. The petitioner contended that the balance amount was not availed in GSTR 3B, leading to the demand confirmed by the second respondent based on a wrong interpretation of the data furnished in the reply.The petitioner provided detailed calculations regarding the tax liability, specifically for IGST, CGST, and SGST. The petitioner's calculations demonstrated that even with the correct figure of ITC claimed in IGST for April 2019, there would be no balance payable, resulting in no revenue loss or belated payment of tax. The petitioner emphasized that the tax liability was adjusted appropriately, and any excess claim of ITC was accounted for.The respondent, represented by the Additional Government Pleader, argued that the writ petition challenging the impugned order was filed belatedly, citing the judgment of the Supreme Court in a similar case. It was contended that the appeal before the Appellate Commissioner would have been time-barred on the date of filing the writ petition, further justifying the dismissal of the petition.In the judgment, the court acknowledged the delay in filing the writ petition but recognized that the petitioner may have a case for explanation before the Appellate Commissioner. Therefore, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was impleaded as the third respondent. The court directed the petitioner to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017 within 30 days and instructed the third respondent to consider and dispose of the appeal within 5 months, without limitations on merits, and in accordance with the law. The petitioner was required to pre-deposit the amount as per the Act and would be given an opportunity to be heard before a fresh order was passed.Ultimately, the writ petition was dismissed with liberty granted for the petitioner to appeal before the Appellate Authority. No costs were imposed, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.