TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 510X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can rectify the mistake in respect of the period in which it is granted. Subsequently, this is the law which has been taken note in several judgments. Question here is of disputed question of fact and this Court cannot be expected to decide the disputed question of fact within the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under Section 107 of the GST Act against the impugned order Ext. P15. If the petitioner submits all the documents in his favour before the appellate authority, the authority will examine it in accordance with law and pass an order accordingly. - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH For t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .88. The petitioner did not file reply to the said show cause notice and therefore, Ext. P7 Form GST DRC-01A dated 29.06.2021 was issued to the petitioner, asking the petitioner to pay the difference amount of Rs. 6,12,127.88 as per the GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B return for the financial year 2017- 2018. The petitioner was also assessed interest and penalty and the total amount in respect of SGST came to 5,29,138.78 and the same amount for CGST also. The petitioner was asked to submit any explanation, if any, by 23.07.2021. 4. The petitioner submitted his reply to the GST DRC-01A by Ext.P8. 5. As per his reply to the show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01A took the plea that, there was an uploading mistake in GSTR 3B. Total taxable supply and r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has issued to the petitioner. The petitioner claimed that the mistakes committed in affording return for February 2018 were rectified by filing GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C and were examined by the assessing authority. It was said that on examination, much higher difference in OPT liability as per 9C than that mentioned in DRC 01A. From the data in respect of GSTR-9C and GSTR-3B of the petitioner, it was noticed that the petitioner had not conceded outward taxable supply for Rs. 40,18,303/- with SGST liability of Rs. 3,07,774/- and CGST liability of Rs. 3,07,774/-. Even though the petitioner had conceded the taxable turnover in GSTR-9C which the petitioner had omitted the same in GSTR 3B. Thus, it was assessed that the petitioner had not remitted th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and the time limit prescribed in the circular dated 28.12.2017 in Circular No. 26/26/2017-GST by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Excise and Customs, GST Policy Wing should not have been created in view of the several judgments passed by different High Courts including the judgment passed by Gujarat High Court in Deepak Print Vs. Union of India in Civil Application No. 18157 of 2019 dated 09.03.2021, wherein paragraph 4 of the Circular No. 26/26/2017-GST has been read down to the extent that it restricts the rectification of Form GSTR-3B in respect of the period in which the error has occurred. The Gujarat High Court has allowed and permitted the petitioner in that case to rectify Form GSTR-3B for the period to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
