9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to allow amendments in the GSTR-1 form filed for the period January, 2018 to August, 2018 so as to correctly reflect the input tax credit as well as the output tax liability of the petitioner. 3. Petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of passenger car tyres with a manufacturing facility in the State of Haryana. Following enactment of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (briefly, 'the CGST Act' hereinafter) and the related laws, petitioner got itself registered under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime in the State of Telangana. 4. Pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... objection was raised in the hearing on 18.10.2022 that in terms of Section 39(9) of the CGST Act as well as of the Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (briefly, 'the TGST Act') which are in pari materia, the period for rectification of any omission or incorrect particulars is over. Reliance was placed on a decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Bharti Airtel Ltd 2021 (54) G.S.T.L. 257 (SC). Learned counsel for the petitioner sought for time to examine the aforesaid decision. Accordingly, the matter has been listed today. Relevant portion of the order dated 18.10.2022 reads as under: "By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a direction to respondent No.1 to allow the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd., (supra) and instead submits that her case is squarely covered by the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Siddharth Enterprises v. Nodal Officer 2019 (29) G.S.T.L. 664 (Guj.). She has also placed reliance on a Single Bench decision of the Madras High Court in M/s. SUN DYE CHEM v. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (W.P.No.29676 of 2019, decided on 06.10.2020). 8. On the other hand, Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned counsel for respondent No.6 has referred to sub-section (9) of Section 39 of the CGST Act and submits that legislature has consciously prescribed the limitation period to enable a taxable person to claim rectification of any omission/incorrect particulars. Once the limitation period is over, it is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, tax payable, tax paid and such other particulars, in such form and manner, and within such time, as may be prescribed. Sub-section (9) 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., he 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 says 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 relevan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred to in the concerned judgments, and cited before us, as in our opinion, these decisions have not dealt with the cardinal aspect of statutory obligation fastened upon the registered person to maintain books of accounts and record within the meaning of Chapter VII of the 2017 Rules, which are primary documents and source material on the basis of which self-assessment is done by the registered person including about his eligibility and entitlement to get ITC and of OTL. Form GSTR-2A is only a facilitator for taking an informed decision while doing such self-assessment. Non performance or non-operability of Form GSTR-2A or for that matter, other forms, will be of no avail because the dispensation stipulated at the relevant time obliged the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssumption that the only remedy that can enable the assessee to enjoy the benefit of the seamless utilization of the input tax credit is by way of rectification of its return submitted in Form GSTR-3B for the relevant period in which the error had occurred. Any unilateral change in such return as per the present dispensation, would have cascading effect on the recipients and suppliers associated with the concerned transactions. There would be complete uncertainty and no finality could ever be attached to the self-assessment return filed electronically. We agree with the submission of the appellant that any indulgence shown contrary to the statutory mandate would not only be an illegality but in reality, would simply lead to chaotic situation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
