TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 729
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xtract the communication which reads thus: "Office of the Dy. Commissioner of State Tax, Pune_LTU_505, Large Tax Prayers Unit-I, Cabin No.422, 4th Floor, GST Bhavan, Airport Road Yerwada, PUNE-411006 Tel. 26609032 [email protected] To. M/s. Star Engineers(I) Private Limited, 54/2,D-11 Block MIDC-Chinchwad, Pune-411019, Maharashtra, GSTN: 27AAHCS6334BIZI No:DCST /LTU-1 /E-506 /Star Engineers/ 27AAHCS6334BIZI/ 23-24/B-252 Pune DT.27/09/2023 Subject: Regarding Application for seeking approval to modify / amend From GSTR-1 for FY2021-22. Reference : Your application on dated 11/09/2023. _____________ With reference to the above subject, you have requested for correction in Form GSTR-1 of FY 2021-22 namely for the months of July 2021, November 2021 and January 2022 on account of human error committed by your Company wherein, inadvertently, GSTINs of "Ship to" parties were reported in GSTR-1 instead of "Bill to" party-Bajaj Auto Limited. From the evaluation of facts and supporting thereof, through there does not appear to be any loss of revenue to the Gove....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essing the payment of the petitioner for the month of March 2023, BAL reduced the amount equivalent to the GST amount, interalia stating that BAL had not claimed the said invoices for ITC as same were not appearing in Form GSTR-2B, as GSTIN of a third party was given instead of BAL. Consequently BAL debited the mismatched amount to the petitioner's account. 6. It is in such circumstances, the petitioner approached the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax by its letter dated 11 September 2023 interalia contending that the petitioner has fulfilled its tax obligation in relation to the supplies made to BAL during the financial year 2021-22, which indicated that all the required taxes associated with the transactions involving BAL have been appropriately and duly paid by the petitioner to the Government and that the petitioner had also complied all GST Regulations. It was contended that post identification of the inadvertent error made during filing of Form GSTR-1, petitioner has taken proactive steps and secured confirmation from the respective third party companies, confirming the non-availment of ITC at their end. Accordingly, it was contended that what had occurred was merely a proc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ling the details leading to the mismatch of credit, the assessee ought not to be prejudiced from availing the credit, which they otherwise legitimately are entitled to and to that effect the rectification of error ought to be permitted. Accordingly, in such cases a relief was granted to the petitioner. It is, thus, Mr. Raichandani's submission that the prayer of the petitioner that it be permitted to amend or rectify the Form GSTR-1 for the period in question ought to be granted. 8. On the other hand, Ms. Vyas, learned Counsel for the Revenue while not disputing the factual matrix would submit that no fault can be found in the impugned communication as the provisions of the GST Act itself would not permit the State Tax Officer to accept the request as made by the petitioner for amendment / rectification of Form GSTR-1 which was filed by the petitioner for the period in question. Ms. Vyas has also fairly stated that if the request as made by the petitioner is to be accepted, there is no loss of revenue whatsoever to the public exchequer. 9. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the record, there is much substance in the contention as urged on behalf o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch details for such class of taxable persons as may be specified therein : Provided also that any extension of time limit notified by the Commissioner of central tax shall be deemed to be notified by the Commissioner. (2) Every registered person who has been communicated the details under subsection (3) of section 38 or the details pertaining to inward supplies of Input Service Distributor under sub-section (4) of section 38, shall either accept or reject the details so communicated, on or before the seventeenth day, but not before the fifteenth day, of the month succeeding the tax period and the details furnished by him under sub-section (1) shall stand amended accordingly. (3) Any registered person, who has furnished the details under sub-section (1) for any tax period and which have remained unmatched under section 42 section 43, shall, upon discovery of any error or omission therein, rectify such error or omission in such manner as may be prescribed, and shall pay the tax and interest, if any, in case there is a short payment of tax on account of Such error or omission, in the return to be furnished for such tax period : Provided that no rect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... event the assessee has not furnished the return for one or more previous tax period or has not furnished the details of outward supplies as per subsection (1) of section 37 in the said tax period. Sub-section (9) and (10) of Section 39 are required to be noted which read thus:- "Section 39. Furnishing of returns - (1) ... ... ... ... .. .. ... .. (8) Every registered person who is required to furnish a return under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall furnish a return for every tax period whether or not any supplies of goods or services or both have been made during such tax period. (9) ^5[Where] any registered person after furnishing a return under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) or subsection (4) or sub-section (5) discovers any omission or incorrect particulars therein, other than as a result of scrutiny, audit, inspection or enforcement activity by the tax authorities, he shall rectify such omission or incorrect particulars in the return to be furnished for the month or quarter during which such omission or incorrect particulars 6[in such form and manner as may be prescribed], subject to payment of interest....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....interpretation of sub- section (3) of Section 37 read with sub-sections (9) and (10) of Section 39 would lead to absurdity and / or bring a regime that GST returns being maintained by the department having incorrect particulars become sacrosanct, which is not what is acceptable to the GST regime, wherein every aspect of the returns has a cascading effect. This is necessarily required to be borne in mind when considering the cases of inadvertent human errors creeping into the filing of GST returns. 14. Applying such principles to the facts of the present case, in our opinion, the State Tax Officer had all materials before it which went to show that there was nothing illegal and / or that what had happened at the end of the petitioner was that the invoices generated by the petitioner under the bill-to-ship-to-model for delivery of goods to third party vendors of BAL of which input tax credit for the invoices in question, were not availed by BAL due to error of credit not being reflected in the GSTR-1, as the petitioner had mentioned GSTIN of third party instead of GSTIN of BAL. This is also accepted by the State Tax Officer in the impugned communication. 15. As a result of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rectification should have been carried out by 13 April 2019. The petitioner contended that an error came to be noticed after the said third party held up the running bill amount of the petitioner by informing it of the error on 21 January 2020. The petitioner contended that thereafter it was making a request to the department to correct the GSTR-1 form, but it was not allowed. It is in these circumstances, the Court considering the fact that in permitting the petitioner to rectify such error, there was no loss of revenue whatsoever to the department, that it was only about the ITC benefit which was to be given to the customer of the petitioner, failing which a prejudice would be caused to the petitioner. The Division Bench referring to the decision in Sun Dye Chem (supra) granted the prayer of the petitioner for setting aside the letter of rejection as impugned in the proceedings and permitting the petitioner to resubmit the corrected returns in Form - B2B under GSTR-1 for the period in question. 19. The Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court in Mahalaxmi Infra Contract Ltd. (supra) has taken a similar view wherein the Division Bench after considering the rival contentions a....