2024 (5) TMI 48 - HC - GST

Rectification application - tax proposals confirmed on two discrepancies - rectification application of the petitioner was not uploaded on the portal - HELD THAT - On perusal of the impugned order and the rectification application, it appears that the confirmed tax proposals pertain to discrepancies between the petitioner's turnover as per the financial statement and the auto populated GSTR 2A as also discrepancies between the petitioner's annual return in Form GSTR 9 and the monthly returns in Form GSTR 3B. From the enclosures to the rectification application, it appears that the petitioner has enclosed relevant documents to endeavor to reconcile the differences. In these circumstances, it is just and appropriate to direct that such application be considered expeditiously. Petition is disposed of by directing the respondent to consider and dispose of rectification application dated 26.02.2024 within two months from the date of receipt a copy of this order.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to order in original, rectification application, discrepancies in turnover, tax proposals, relevant documents submission.

Judgment Summary:

Challenge to Order in Original: The writ petition challenges an order dated 28.12.2023, following the initiation of proceedings against the petitioner through a show cause notice dated 19.04.2023. The petitioner filed a rectification application subsequent to the issuance of the impugned order.

Discrepancies in Turnover: The petitioner's counsel highlighted that while most alleged discrepancies were dropped, two were confirmed due to the inability to submit relevant documents. The discrepancies related to turnover differences between the profit and loss account and GSTR 2A, as well as between GSTR 9 and GSTR 3B returns. The rectification application included a reconciliation statement for these differences.

Consideration of Rectification Application: The Additional Government Pleader acknowledged the non-uploading of the petitioner's rectification application on the portal. He assured that upon uploading, the application would be reviewed and resolved promptly.

Judicial Direction: Upon reviewing the impugned order and rectification application, it was noted that the confirmed tax proposals were based on the mentioned discrepancies in turnover. The petitioner had enclosed relevant documents to reconcile these differences. Consequently, the court directed the respondent to expedite the consideration and disposal of the rectification application within two months from the date of receipt of the court's order, with the petitioner instructed to upload the application by 26.04.2024.

Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of with the directive for timely processing of the rectification application. No costs were awarded, and related motions were closed as a result of the judgment.