2021 (3) TMI 524

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nior Standing Counsel for R1, R3 and R4 and Mr.ANR. Jayaprathap, learned Government Advocate for R2. 2. The petitioner seeks a mandamus directing the respondents to rectify the mistake in its GSTR-1 return, wherein it has, instead of the GST number of the purchaser in Andhra Pradesh, mentioned the GST number of the purchaser in Uttar Pradesh. 3. The petitioner, engaged in the manufacture of Construction Equipment, is registered with State GST Authority/R2 and files returns in terms of the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short 'CGST Act'). The issue that arises in this matter is substantially covered by my decision in the case of Sun Dye Chem Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) [2020 VIL 524 (Mad)]. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....posed a difficulty to the recipient in the matter of availment. I have taken a view noticing that the error arose out of inadvertence, that such bonafide mistakes must be permitted to be corrected, stating at paragraphs 17 to 21 as follows: 17. A registered person who files a return under Section 39(1) involving intra-State outward supply is to indicate the collection of taxes customer-wise in monthly return in Form GSTR-1 and the details of tax payment therein are auto populated in Form GSTR -2-A of the buyers. Any mismatch between Form GSTR-1 and Form GSTR-2A is to be notified by the recipient by way of a tabulation in Form GSTR-1A. Admittedly, Forms in GSTR-2A and GSTR-1A are yet to be notified as on date. The statutory procedure conte....