2019-VIL-328-KAR

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Section 39(9) of the CGST Act, 2017 – Bonafide mistake in Form GSTR-1 - Belated amendment/rectification to Form GSTR-1 - Petitioner seeking direction to respondents to allow amendments in the GSTR-1 form filed for the period January, 2018 to August, 2018 – in the FORM GSTR-1 submitted by the petitioner for the aforesaid period, the details of one of the buyer-distributor were wrongly mentioned, consequently, the input tax credit for the said transaction is being reflected in petitioner’s another distributor - Revenue contends that in terms of Section 39(9) of the CGST Act the period for rectification of any omission or incorrect particulars is not permissible for being beyond the period of limitation – Whether the petition is entitled to rectification of Form GSTR-1 after the expiry of statutorily prescribed period - HELD - Sub-section (9) of Section 39 the CGST Act provides that if after furnishing such return a registered person discovers any omission or incorrect particulars other than as a result of scrutiny, audit etc., assessee shall rectify such omission or incorrect particulars in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, subject to payment of interest etc. - The proviso states that no such rectification of any omission or incorrect particulars shall be allowed after the due date for furnishing of return for the month of September or second quarter following the end of the financial year to which such details pertain or the actual date of furnishing of relevant annual return, whichever is earlier - In the Bharti Airtel case the Supreme Court held that when law provides for rectification of errors and omissions in the specified manner, assessee cannot be permitted to carry out rectification beyond the statutorily prescribed period - Supreme Court considered the mechanism provided by Section 39(9) of the CGST Act and took the view that allowing the assessee to carry out rectification of errors and omissions beyond the statutorily prescribed period would lead to complete uncertainty and collapse of the tax administration – Petitioner’s case is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd case - Accordingly, no merit in this writ petition and the same is dismissed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page