2019 (4) TMI 1495 - HC - GST

Revision of return - filing of GSTR 3B Form manually - HELD THAT - This court is of the opinion that the petitioner s argument is well founded. The respondents are enjoined not to raise any demands towards penalty, interest or late filing fee. Late fee, if any, paid by the petitioner, shall be refunded to the petitioner. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Revision of return after obtaining credit with design limitations.
2. Court directions for manual filing of GSTR-3B form.
3. Verification of credits in respect of local areas.
4. Approval of interest liability.
5. Set-off of credit towards notional demand.
6. Enforcement of further demands by respondents.
7. Refund of late fee paid by petitioner.

Revision of Return after Obtaining Credit with Design Limitations:
The petitioner attempted to revise its return after obtaining credit, but faced challenges due to design limitations. The court permitted manual lodging of GSTR-3B form on specific dates. The court acknowledged related proceedings and directed verification of credits in local areas. The petitioner's argument was based on system problems arising from design limitations.

Court Directions for Manual Filing of GSTR-3B Form:
The court directed proper verification of the manually filed GSTR-3B form in coordination with the concerned Commissionerate. No demand was to be imposed towards interest claims approved by the respondents. The claim for set-off of credit towards a notional demand was to be duly verified in accordance with the law.

Verification of Credits in Respect of Local Areas:
The court emphasized the need for verification of credits in respect of local areas, ensuring compliance with legal requirements. The directions aimed to facilitate the completion of proceedings in this regard, ensuring proper assessment of input claims.

Approval of Interest Liability and Set-off of Credit Towards Notional Demand:
The court approved the interest liability and directed the verification of the petitioner's claim for the set-off of credit towards a notional demand of ?16.80 crores. The subsequent developments led to the reversal of the notional demand, resolving the petitioner's grievance.

Enforcement of Further Demands by Respondents:
Given the peculiar facts and circumstances, the court found the petitioner's argument well-founded. The respondents were instructed not to raise any demands towards penalty, interest, or late filing fee. Any late fee paid by the petitioner was to be refunded.

Refund of Late Fee Paid by Petitioner:
In light of the resolved grievance and subsequent developments, no claims were deemed to survive for adjudication. The writ petition was disposed of in the specified terms, ensuring fairness and compliance with the legal principles involved in the case.