9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 1382 - HC - GSTValidity of assessment order - failure to report correct tax liability while filing the annual returns in Form GSTR 9 - HELD THAT - The petitioner has placed on record show cause notice dated 28.12.2023 and the reply dated 16.04.2024. By such reply, the petitioner asserts that both the GSTR 3B and 9 returns contained clerical errors. This reply was taken into consideration in the impugned order while confirming the tax proposal. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that principles of natural justice were violated. Consequently, discretionary jurisdiction not exercised. Petition disposed off.
Issues involved: Challenge to assessment order based on failure to report correct tax liability in annual returns; Availability of Input Tax Credit (ITC) not considered in tax proposal; Compliance with principles of natural justice in considering petitioner's reply.
In this case, the petitioner challenged an assessment order dated 29.04.2024, which was issued after receiving a show cause notice dated 28.12.2023 regarding the failure to report correct tax liability while filing annual returns in Form GSTR 9. The petitioner argued that they failed to report inward supply in monthly and annual returns for the financial year 2018-2019, despite having an available Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs. 5,40,185/- in the auto-populated GSTR 2A. The tax proposal for Rs. 2,71,465/- each towards CGST and SGST was confirmed without considering this ITC. The respondents contended that the petitioner lost entitlement to ITC for not filing returns within the prescribed time limit under Section 16(4). They also claimed that the petitioner's reply was considered, and principles of natural justice were followed. The petitioner submitted a reply dated 16.04.2024, asserting that both GSTR 3B and 9 returns contained clerical errors, which were taken into account in the impugned order confirming the tax proposal. The court noted that the petitioner's reply was considered in the assessment order, indicating compliance with principles of natural justice. Consequently, the court declined to exercise discretionary jurisdiction and disposed of the writ petition without costs, allowing the petitioner to avail of the statutory remedy. The connected miscellaneous petitions were also closed as a result of the judgment.
|
