2021 (1) TMI 300 - HC - GST

Seeking direction to respondent authorities to accept the manual GSTR 3B return from the petitioner and to process the same for the period August, 2018 to August 2019 - seeking direction to respondent authorities to open the GST portal by permitting the petitioner to amend its summary GSTR 3B return for the period August, 2018 to August, 2019 - seeking direction to respondent authorities to decide the representation dated 15.11.2019 and 5.11.2019 (Annexure Nos.6 4) filed by the petitioner - seeking direction to respondent authorities to refund the input tax credit as is available to the petitioner for the period August, 2018 to August, 2019. HELD THAT - Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and with the consent, the writ petition is disposed of asking the competent authority, i.e. respondent nos. 4 and 5, Joint Commissioner (I.T. Cell), Commercial Tax, 7-A, Ashok Marg, Lucknow and Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, State GST Department, Division-4, Jhansi to decide the representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Mandamus to accept manual GSTR 3B return and process it.
2. Mandamus to open GST portal for amending summary GSTR 3B return.
3. Mandamus to decide on representations filed by the petitioner.
4. Mandamus to refund input tax credit available to the petitioner.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a mandamus to direct the respondent authorities to accept the manual GSTR 3B return and process it for the period from August 2018 to August 2019. The petitioner relied on a judgment from the Delhi High Court regarding rectification of returns, emphasizing the need to rectify errors in the relevant period. The court noted the relevance of the Delhi High Court judgment and directed the authorities to verify and give effect to the rectified return within two weeks once filed.

2. Another relief sought by the petitioner was a mandamus to open the GST portal for amending the summary GSTR 3B return for the same period. The court acknowledged the petitioner's reliance on the Delhi High Court judgment and directed the authorities to address the petitioner's claim in light of that judgment. The court emphasized the importance of considering the representation made by the petitioner before the concerned authorities, ensuring a final decision is taken promptly.

3. The petitioner also requested a mandamus for the respondent authorities to decide on representations dated 15.11.2019 and 5.11.2019. The court, without expressing any opinion on the case's merits, disposed of the writ petition, directing the competent authorities to decide on the petitioner's representations expeditiously and in accordance with the law. The court highlighted the need for the authorities to address the petitioner's representations promptly and in compliance with legal requirements.

4. Lastly, the petitioner sought a mandamus for the respondent authorities to refund the input tax credit available for the period from August 2018 to August 2019. The court, while not delving into the case's merits, disposed of the petition with directions for the competent authorities to decide on the petitioner's representation swiftly and in adherence to legal procedures. The court emphasized the importance of addressing the petitioner's claim for input tax credit refund promptly and in accordance with the law.