TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 784
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rected to accept and acknowledge such GSTR3B manually filed by the petitioners for August 2017; (B) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to give effect to the details contained in GSTR3B for August 2017 filed manually and be further pleased to direct the respondents to indicate discharge of the petitioner's GST liability for August 2017 in the electronic liability register as contemplated under Rule 88(2) of the CGST Rules, 2017; (C) Any other further relief as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also please be granted." 2. It is the case of the petitioners in the petition that for August 2017, the total tax liability of the petitioner was Rs. 128,63,47,508/and that the petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n and details in all the columns of this return were shown as "zero" despite the fact that the tax liability for the month in question had been duly paid by the petitioner. 4. Since the GSTR3B was uploaded on the common portal in the above manner, the requirement of subrule (2) of Rule 88 of the CGST Rules, viz., indicating the Unique Identification Number relating to discharge of liability in the corresponding entry in the electronic liability register, has not been made in the system which operates on its own, that is, the petitioners have no access to make any entry in the system and consequently, not in the electronic liability register maintained under Rule 85 of the CGST Rules. 5. The petitioners, therefore, immediately informed t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... were received so far. By a letter dated 10.9.2018, the petitioners were informed that steps were being taken to refer the matter to the GSTN; by a letter dated 28.08.2018, the petitioners were informed to follow the instruction/guideline mentioned in para 3 of the Circular No.26/26/2017GST dated 29.12.2017; and lastly, by a letter dated 07.03.2019, the petitioners were informed that they have already been requested to follow the instruction/guideline mentioned in para 3 of the Circular No.26/26/2017GST dated 29.12.2017 by the Deputy Commissioner by a letter dated 28.08.2018. However, in none of the replies, the respondents have taken a stand that the petitioners have not paid the amount, as stated by them. Besides, despite such a long time....