2024 (6) TMI 1101 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Correction of mistake in filing annual returns for the year 2014-15 - existence of provision to enable the filing of a revised copy of stock inventory as on 31-03- 2015 - HELD THAT - The petitioner is entitled to an order permitting him to file / upload a revised stock statement as of 31-03- 2015. Sub-rule (4A) of Rule 22 of the 2005 Rules contemplate the filing of a revised return where the dealer detects any omission or mistake in the return submitted by him under sub rule (1) of Rule 22. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 22 deals with the documents that have to be uploaded by the dealer along with the return filed under sub-rule (1) of Rule 22. In the facts of the present case the mistake on the part of the petitioner was that she uploaded the stock inventory as on 28-05-2015 instead of the stock inventory as on 31-03-2015 which is the requirement under Rule 22 (3)(v) of the 2005 Rules . This writ petition will stand disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to permit the petitioner to correct the copy of stock inventory (closing stock) as on 31-03- 2015 which was filed along with the annual returns submitted by the petitioner for the year 2014-15. Thereafter, the petitioner shall suitably reply to Exts. P6 to P8 notices.

Summary

Issues:
1. Correction of mistake in filing annual returns for the year 2014-15.
2. Interpretation of Rule 22 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, 2005.
3. Permissibility of revising documents uploaded along with returns.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, a registered dealer in Marbles, Granite, and tiles, mistakenly uploaded the closing stock statement as on 28-05-2015 instead of 31-03-2015 while filing annual returns for 2014-15. The petitioner sought permission to rectify this error by filing an email communication (Ext. P1) with the Assessing Authority. Subsequently, the petitioner received notices (Exts. P6 to P8) regarding the mistake.

2. The Senior Government Pleader argued that while Rule 22 of the 2005 Rules allows for correction of returns, it does not explicitly cover documents required to be uploaded along with the returns as per sub-rule (3) of Rule 22. The petitioner was advised to respond to the notices and allow the respondent to finalize the matter in accordance with the law.

3. After hearing both parties, the court held that the petitioner should be permitted to file a revised stock statement as of 31-03-2015. Referring to sub-rule (4A) of Rule 22, which allows for a revised return in case of detected omissions or mistakes, the court reasoned that this provision should also apply to correcting mistakes in documents uploaded along with the returns. The judgment directed the 2nd respondent to allow the petitioner to correct the stock inventory mistake and respond to the notices. The 2nd respondent was instructed to drop further proceedings if satisfied with the genuineness of the mistake and make a decision within four months from the date of the judgment.

In conclusion, the judgment upheld the petitioner's request to rectify the error in the uploaded stock inventory and emphasized the need for a comprehensive interpretation of the rules to allow for corrections in both returns and accompanying documents.