Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE ON RECTIFICATION IN GSTR-1 and 3B

GST UPDATE ON RECTIFICATION IN GSTR-1 and 3B
As per CGST ACT any registered person who has furnished the details under sub-section (1) for any tax period and which have remained unmatched under section 42 or section 43 can rectify such error or omission upon discovery 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. Such rectification of error or omission in respect of the details furnished under sub-section (1) is allowed till furnishing of the return under section 39 for the month of September following the end of the financial year to which such details pertain, or furnishing of the relevant annual return, whichever is earlier. In the view of above provision of Act The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in its recent decision in case of Abdul Mannan Khan v. the GST Council & Ors dismissed the petition of assessee to rectify GTSR -1 after the specified time limit in the law. Here the assesse inadvertently uploaded the sale invoice in name of unregistered person instead of registered person and made an application after one and half year for rectification in GSTR-1 due to restriction of ITC availment by buyer. Court ruled “the statute has provided a period of limitation for seeking rectification and the Court cannot condone the limitation period provided for rectification of GSTR-1 Form as per Section 37 of the under CGST Act and condoning such delay would make the provision otiose and open the floodgates for similar cases”. On the contrary Madras HC has recently allowed the writ petition in case of Pentacle Plant Machineries Pvt. Ltd. v. Office of the GST Council and others. It was allowed on the reasoning that the asseesee can correct the human error in the GSTR -1. Court said that correction should be allowed for the inadvertent human error. Here the asseesee, while filing the GSTR -1 instead of GST number of purchaser in Aandhra Pradesh mentioned the GST number Uttar Pradesh. This writ petition has been allowed by Madras HC on the basis of decision in case of SUN DYE CHEM where the assessee while filing the GSTR-1 have wrongly filed the output tax as IGST instead of CGST, SGST and credit of the buyer was blocked. The error was noticed by buyer only after the last date of correction in GSTR -1 i.e. 31st march 2019. Court ruled that since the aseesee was not able to track mistake as the form GSTR -1A and and GSTR-2 was not operationalized. Therefore credit should not be blocked on the basis of inadvertent human error and the court directed permitting the petitioner to resubmit the annexures to GSTR-3B. The petitioner should not be mulcted with any liability on account of the bonafide, human error and the petitioner must be permitted to correct the same. In line with the above view Delhi HC in case of BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS where there was short claimed input of assessee was amounted to Rs 923 crore and the main reason of such non detection was non-operationalization of Forms GSTR-2A, GSTR-2, and GSTR-3. The High Court also affirmed that since the validations and verification checks proposed in CGST Act, 2017 could not be practically implemented due to lack of proper IT infrastructure, the petitioner could not be denied the opportunity of correcting its mistake in reflection of input tax credit, particularly when there is no mechanism to claim refund of tax paid by them in cash. Circular prescribing rectification of mistakes in subsequent returns is contrary to the return mechanism contained in section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017. Restriction can be introduced by way of circular only if it is in conformity with the scheme of the Act and provisions contained therein. As the circular is going contrary to the scheme of the Act, the same should not be implemented. High Court allowed the petitioner to rectify GSTR-3B for the period July, 2017 to September, 2017. Based on the above case laws, we can say that authorities should also take lenient view in case of genuine and inadvertent human error by allowing the assesee to rectify the GST returns. Consequently, it will not block ITC of purchaser. If it is not done then it would be harsh on assessee as the purchaser will not pay the GST amount to supplier as credit is not available to him. But the amount has been paid in Government exchequer. Simply non- rectification of mistake for a period will deprive the taxpayer of its legitimate credit though the same has been deposited to Government. Such an approach coupled with technical glitches in portal will be very harsh for poor taxpayers in these difficult period of pandemic.
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com