CWP No. 25343 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Bar Code India Limited Union of India and others
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present:
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.
petitioner can be permitted to rectify/ amend the GST number of the purchaser in GSTR
(on account of human error) for the quarter ending 3 limitation period is expired in terms of Section 37(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, 'the Act').
2.
company is a limited company and was r 06AAACB2892A1Z5. It is dealing with solutions in Enterprise Mobility, Bar Coding, RFID and EWLAN for supply chain and asset management in the retail, manufacturing and logistics market verticals.
3.
Transportation & Supply Chain Services (India) Private Limited, the
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 25343 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of Pronouncement :
Versus
Mr. Simarpal Sawhney, Advocate and Mr. Rahul Makkar, Advocate, for the Mr. Ajay Kalra, Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents. ***
The short question involved in the present case is whether the -1 return with respect to the invoices dated 13.05.2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner Pursuant to the order placed
-1- Reserved on : 06.11.2024
14.11.2024
…Petitioner …Respondents petitioner. 0.06.2021 after the egistered with GSTIN No. by purchaser FedEx Express
1 of 16
petitioner company issued invoices to the purchaser for financial year 2021 2022 where erroneously at the time of filing of GSTR company made certain inadvertent errors by mentioning the point of sale as Mumbai instead of Delhi and also mentioned the GST number of the receiver/ purchaser of Mumbai instead of GST number of the purchaser in Delhi.
4.
errors in the GSTR after the concerned month of April 2023 The purchaser
Immediately,
respondent no.3 in their return relating to the three invoices Revenue, however, rejected the prayer provision to make amendments
Rules had expired. There was no provision also to make amendments by a manual request.
company ought not be made to suffer on account of inadvertent human error which is apparent on the face of the record having occurred without there being any deliberation on part of the petitio
petitioner company is seriously affected on account of the said refusal to make the correction.
5.
Karnataka High Court in WP No. 2911 of 2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner sub -1 return filed the petitioner purchaser notified the error to them somewhere in the as they found difficulty to avail GST input tax credit further refused to clear the other invoices of the petitioner thereafter the petitioner sent letter
praying for allowing them to make necessary amendments on account of there being no
after the time period laid down under the
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner relie
-2- -
-1 return, the petitioner mits that the aforesaid came to their knowledge
.
.
dated 18.08.2023 to issued on 13.05.2021. The ner. The business of the s on judgments of
- M/s Orient Traders vs The
2 of 16
Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and another,
16.12.2022, Jharkhand High Court in WP (T) No. 2478 of 2021
Mahalaxmi Infra Contract Limited vs GST Council and others,
18.10.2022; Madras High Court in
Electronics India Private Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and another
Waterhouse Coopers Private Limited vs CIT, Kolkata
316; and Bombay High Court in
Private Limited vs Union of India and others
6.
learned counsel p omission in terms of Section 37(3) of the Act for the A. Y. 2021 30.11.2022. It is submitted that the petitioner ought to have been cautioned enough in checking it
could have e
rectification of such errors till the filing of annual return.
7.
ample time to rectify the errors. The time limit as laid down in Sect of the Act cannot be allowed to be altered for a particular company and they will have to bear the loss as no general rule can be laid down and there cannot be an open ended time frame for corrections/ rectifications. submits that the time fra
for furnishing of audit report
cascading effect on the other processes and it is important to conclude the entire process in the timeline.
WP No. 4458 of 2019
decided on 15.06.2022; Kolkata High Court in
WP No. 15368 of 2023
The reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent
er contra submits that last date
s monthly returns and prior to filing of annual return, it asily rectified in GSTR-1 as the common portal allows Learned counsel for the respondents
me has been aligned with the further time provided
for the respective financial years. There is a
-3- decided on - M/s
decided on - M/s Interplex Price
-1 (2012) 11 SCC
Star Engineers (I)
decided on 14.12.2023. s and
for rectification of error or -2022 was
submits that the Act allows ion 37(3)
He
3 of 16
8.
merely by rectifying Form GSTR allow the concerned recipient tax payer to claim ITC now as the same has also become time barred in terms of Section 16 (4) of the Act. pointed out that after submitting GSTR
generates for the recipient supplier. The same becomes a basis for claiming input tax credit under the GSTR
the date on furnish
i.e. by the month of September following the end of financial year for which the invoice or debit note pertains or the date when the relevant annual return is furnished, whichever is earlier. The co
GSTR-1, therefore, is permissible in terms of the aforesaid timeline.
9.
issue as raised in the present petition stands finally adjudicated by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in
others (2022) 4 SCC 328.
10.
11.
as under:-
It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that -1 at this stage would not automatically
-1 by the supplier, GSTR
-3B. Thus, input tax credit can be availed till ing of the return as provided under Section 39 of the Act Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that
Union of India (UOI) vs Bharti Airtel Limited and
We have considered the submissions. Section 16 (4); Sections 37 (1); 37 (3)
"16. Eligibility and conditions for taking input tax credit.
xxx
(4) A registered person shall not be entitled to take input tax credit in respect of any invoice or debit note for supply of goods or services or both after the thirtieth day of November] following the end of financial year to which such invoice or [xxx] debit note pertains or furnishing of the relevant annual return, whichever is earlier:
-4- It is further -2A auto
rrection in the corresponding the
and 39 of the Act provide xxx xxx
4 of 16
for the month of March, 2019 in respect of any invoice or
Section 37 -
prescribed, the details of outward supplies of goods or services furnishing such details for such class of taxable persons as may
Section 37(3) in The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
[PROVIDED that the registered person shall be entitled to take input tax credit after the due date of furnishing of the return under section 39 for the month of September, the due date of furnishing of the return under the said section invoice relating to such debit note for supply of goods or services or both made during the financial year 2017 details of which have been uploaded by the supplier under sub section (1) of section 37 till the due date for furnishing the details under sub-section (1) of said section for the month of March, 2019.
Furnishing details of outward supplies
"(1) Every registered person, other than an Input Service Distributor, a non- resident taxable person and a person paying tax under the provisions of section 10 or section 51 or section 52, shall furnish, electronically, [subject to such conditions and restrictions and] in such form and manner as may be or both effected during a tax period on or before the tenth day of the month succeeding the said tax period and such details [shall, subject to such conditions and restrictions, within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed, be communicated to the recipient of the said supplies]: [xxx] [PROVIDED that] the Commissioner may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, by notification, extend the ti be specified therein:
[PROVIDED FURTHER that] any extension of time limit notified by the Commissioner of State tax or Commissioner of Union territory tax shall be deemed to be
Commissioner."
-5- 2018 till -18, the -
me limit for notified by the
5 of 16
for such tax period:
financial year to which such details pertain, or furnishing of the furnishing the details under sub
Section 39
person or a person paying tax under the provisions of section prescribed:
furnish a return for every quarter or part thereof, subject to
"(3) Any registered person, who has furnished the details under sub-section (1) for any tax period [xxx], shall, upon discovery of any error or omission therein,
in such manner as may be prescribed, and shall pay the tax and interest, if any, in case there is a short payment of tax on account of such error or omission, in the return to be furnished PROVIDED that no rectification of error or omission in respect of the details furnished under sub
after the thirtieth day of November] following the end of the relevant annual return, whichever is earlier:
[PROVIDED FURTHER that the rectification of error or omission in respect of the details furnished under sub
(1) shall be allowed after furnishing of the return under section 39 for the month of September, 2018 till th
March, 2019 or for the quarter January, 2019 to March, 2019.]"
of The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
39. Furnishing of returns.- (1) Every registered person, than an Input Service Distributor or a non 10 or section 51 or section 52 shall, for every calendar month or part thereof, furnish, a return, electronically, of inward and outward supplies of goods or services or both, input tax credit availed, tax payable, tax paid and such other particulars, in such form and manner, and within such time, as may be Provided that the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, notify certain class of registered persons who shall such conditions and restrictions as may be specified therein
-6- rectify such error or omission -section (1) shall be allowed -section
e due date for
-section (1) for the month of other
-resident taxable
6 of 16
provisions of section 1 form and manner, and wi form and manner as may be prescribed, a return, prescribed, a return, electroni
for every calendar month or part thereof, furnish, in such form persons as may be specified therein:
(2) A registered person paying tax under the 0, shall, for each financial year or part thereof, furnish a return, electronically, of turnover in the State or Union territory, inward supplies of goods or services or both, tax payable, tax paid and such other particulars in such thin such time, as may be prescribed.
(3) Every registered person required to deduct tax at source under the provisions of section 51 shall furnish, in such electronically, for the month in which such deduct been made within ten days after the end of such month.
(4) Every taxable person registered as an Input Service Distributor shall, for every thereof, furnish, in such form and manner as may be cally, within thirteen days after
the end of such month.
(5) Every registered non and manner as may be prescribed, electronically, within thirteen) days after the end of a calendar month or within seven days after the last day of the period of registration specified under sub-section (1) of section 27, whichever is earlier.
(6) The Commissioner may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, by notification, extend t the returns under this section for such class of registered Provided that any extension of time limit notified by the Commissioner of State tax or Union territory tax shall be deemed to be notified by the Commissioner.
(7) Every registered person who is required to furnish a return under sub-section (1), other than the person referred to in the proviso thereto, or sub-section (3) or sub
-7- ions have calendar month or part -resident taxable person shall, he time limit for furnishing - section (5),
7 of 16
prescribed, (a)
(b)
period.
shall pay to the Government the tax due a later than the last date on which he is required to furnish such return:
Provided that every registered person furnishing return under the proviso to section (1) shall pay to the Government, in such form and manner, and within such
-
an amount equal to the tax due taking into account inward and outward supplies of goods or services or both, input tax credit availed, tax payable and such other particulars during a month, or
in lieu of the amount re
amount determined in such
conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed.) Provided further that every registered person furnishing return under sub-section (2) shall pay to the Government the tax due taking into account turnover in the State or Union territory, inward supplies of goods or services or both, tax payable, and such other particulars during a quarter, in such form and manner, and within such time, as may be prescribed.]
(8) Every registered person who is required to furnish a n a return under sub-section (1) or sub
a return for every tax period whether or not any supplies of goods or services or both have been made during such tax
(9) Where any registered person after fu under sub-section (1) or sub section (2) or sub sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) discovers any omission or incorrect particulars therein, other than as a result of scrutiny, audit, inspection or enforcement activity by the tax authorities, he shall rectify such omission or incorrect particulars "fin such
-8- s per such return not time, as may be ferred to in clause (a), an manner and subject to such -section (2) shall furnish rnishing a return
-section (3) or
8 of 16
form and manner as may be prescribed), subject to payment of financial year to which such details pertain), or the actual date periods "for the details of outward supplies under sub furnish the return, even if he has not furnished th for the said tax period.
years from the due date of furnishing the said return: Provided person or a class of registered persons to furnish the return for period of three years from the due date of fu
12.
submitted by learned counsel for the Revenue is complete in itself and each step precedes the earlier step. If one of the steps is erroneous and the same is not corrected or rectified within the timeline provided under the provision interest under this Act Provided that no such rectification of any omission or incorrect particulars shall be allowed after the due the thirtieth day of November] following [the end of the of furnishing of relevant annual
(10) A registered person shall not be allowed to furnish a return for a tax period if the return for any of the previous tax
(1) of section 37 for the said tax period has not been furnished by him Provided that the Go
recommendations of the Council, by notification, subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be specified therein, allow a registered person or a class of registered persons to one or more previous tax periods or has not furnished the details of outward supplies under sub
(11) A registered person shall not be allowed to furnish a return for a tax period after the ex
that the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be specified therein, allow a regi a he return for a tax period, even after the expiry of the said return.
From the aforesaid provisions, it is appar
-9- return, whichever is earlier. -section
vernment may, on the e returns for
-section (1) of section 37 piry of a period of three stered
rnishing the said ent that the process as s, a
9 of 16
cascading effect would occur to the subsequent process provided under the subsequent provisions. We are satisfied from the aforesaid provisions that if a person submits an erroneous GSTR
subsequent GSTR
information and the consequences thereof shall follow.
13.
37(1) and 37(3) of the Act, is linked directly and proportionately to Section 16 (4) of the Act. In
availed till the due date of furnishing the return under Section 39 of the Act for the month of September following the end of the financial year to which the invoice / debit note pertains or furni
is earlier. The correction in the corresponding GSTR
terms of the timeline as specified in Section 16 (4) of the Act.
14.
petitioner could not detect the error of mentioning the point of sale as Mumbai instead of Delhi and the mentioning of the GST number of purchaser of Mumbai instead of GST number of purchaser of Delhi which has resultant,
could not avail the ITC. Last date of submission for rectification/ omission, admittedly falls on 30.11.2022 for the concerned petitioner.
15.
Engineers (I) Private Limited
petitioner, particularly in paras 12 and 13, are as under:
-1, and does not correct it, the
-2A and GSTR-3B would also reflect the erroneous We find that the time limitation, as provided under Section terms of the aforesaid provisions, input tax credit can be shing of the annual return, whichever
On careful examination of the facts, it clearly emerges that the as per his submissions, loss to the concerne
The observations made by Bombay High Court in (supra), relied upon by learned counsel for the
"12. Having considered the statutory ambit of Section 37, 38 and 39, we are of the clear opinion that the
-10- -1 is permissible in d purchaser, who
Star
-
10 of 16
provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 37 read wi Section 38 and sub-sections (9) and (10) of Section 39 need to be purposively interpreted. We cannot read sub section (3) of Section 37 to mean that the assessee would be prevented from placing the correct position and having accurate particulars in reg
the GST returns being filed by the assessee and that there would not be any scope for any bonafide, and inadvertent rectification / correction. This would presupposes that any inadvertent error which had occurred in filing of the returns, once is permitted to be rectified, any technicality not making a window for such rectification, ought not to defeat the provisions of sub
with the provisions of sub
de hors the provisos.
13. In our opinion, the proviso ought not to defeat the intention of the legislature as borne out on a bare reading of subsection (3) of Section 37 and sub
(9) of Section 39 in the category of cases when there is a bonafide and inadvertent error
particulars in filing of returns, accompanied with the fact that there is no loss of revenue whatsoever in permitting the correction of such mistake. Any contrary interpretation of sub-section (3) of Section 37 read with sub-sections (9) and (10) of Section 39 would lead to absurdity and / or bring a regime that GST returns being maintained by the department having incorrect particulars become sacrosanct, which is not what is acceptable to the GST regime, wherein every aspect of the returns has a cascading effect. This is necessarily required to be borne in mind when considering the cases of inadvertent human errors creeping into the filing of GST returns."
-11- th
-
ard to all the details in -section (3) of Section 37 read -section (9) of Section 39 read -section
in furnishing any
11 of 16
16.
Judge of Madras High Court in
vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) and others
MAD.GST held that from availing credit which they relied on Division Bench judgment of Orissa High Court passed in
Jyoti Construction vs The Chairperson, Central Board of Excise & Customs and others
if no prejudice has been caused to the department, such error ought to be rectified.
17.
considering the question of similar nature. In the said case, the Bharti Airtel has erroneously deposited cash and submitted that if it was allowed to rectify Form GSTR-
in cash towards the OTL would get credited to its electronic cash ledger account. After considering the provisions of Section 39 of the Act, which relates to the final return being filed under Form GSTR set aside the order pas
failure to operationalize the statutory forms enabling auto The Bombay High Court also noticed that the Single
Sun Dye Chem vs Assistant Commissioner
the customers of the assessee should not be prejudiced are otherwise legitimately entitled to. It also MANU/OR/0522/2023 wherei
In Bharti Airtel's case (supra), the Supreme Court was 3B so as to avail ITC for the relevant period, amount p sed by the Delhi High Court observing as under:
"32. Reverting to the analysis of the issues and contentions done by the High Court, it is primarily focused on the grievance of the writ petitioner that due to non
GSTR-2A at the relevant time (July to September 2017), it had been denied of access to the information about its electronic credit ledger account and consequently, availing of ITC for the relevant period and instead to discharge the OTL by paying cash to its vendors. Thus, it has resulted in payment of double tax and unfair advantage to the tax authorities because of their
-12-
2020 TIOL 1858 HC
Shiva
n the Court observed that aid by it
-3B, it proceeded to -
-operability of Form
12 of 16
populating statement of inward supplies of the recipient and petitioner was required to be fully or wholly dependent on the for discharging its obligation to pay OTL for the relevant period between July and September 2017. The answer is person, was under a legal obligation to maintain book Thereafter, Hon'ble the Supreme Court dealt with Section 16 of the Act and held as under:
outward supplies including facil
the discrepancies electronically. The High Court, however, did not enquire into the cardinal question as to whether the writ auto generated information in the ele
emphatic No. In that, the writ petitioner being a registered accounts and records as per the provisions of the 2017 Act and Chapter VII of the 2017 Rules regarding the transactions in respect of which the OTL would occur. Even in the past (till recently upto the 2017 Act came into force), during the pre regime, the writ petitioner (being registered person/assessee) had been maintaining such books of accounts and records and submitting returns on its own. No such auto
electronic data was in vogue. It is the same pattern which had to be followed by the registered person in the post
-
"48. A priori, despite such an express mechanism provided by Section 39(9)
open to the High Court to proceed on the assumption 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
GSTR3-B for the relevant period
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
-13- ity of matching and correcting ctronic common platform an
s of
-GST
-populated
-GST regime.
read with Rule 61, it was not submitted in Form
in which the error had -assessment
13 of 16
18.
mentioning the invoice amount, place of sale and the GSTR Number, the system auto generate GSTR
basis for claiming input tax credit through GSTR
19.
be entitled to take input tax credit after the return under Section 39 of the Ac end of financial year to which such invoice or debit note pertains or furnishing of the relevant annual return, whichever is earlier. Thus, ITC can 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 c
collapse of tax administration of Union, States and Union Territories. Resultantly, assessee cannot be permitted to unilaterally carry out rectification of his returns
submitted electronically in Form GSTR
inevitably would affect the obligations and liabilities of other stakeholders, because of the cascading effect in their electronic records.
49. As noted earlier, the matching and correction process happens on its own as per the mechanism specified in Sections 37 and 38,
3 is generated for the purposes of submission of returns; and once it is submitted, any changes thereto m cascading effect. Therefore, the law permits rectification of errors and omissions only at the initial stages of Forms GSTR-1 and GSTR
manner. It is a different dispensation provided than the one in pre-GST period, which
of auto-populated records and entries."
It is noticed that as soon as the supplier files GSTR -2A of the recipient of the
As per Section 16 (4) of the Act, a registered person shall not t for the month of September following the
-14- haotic situation and -3B, which
after which Form GSTR- ay have
-3, but in the specified did not have the provision -1
supplier, which is the -3B.
due date of furnishing of the
14 of 16
be availed till the due date of furnishing of the return. If ther in the corresponding GSTR
in terms of the timeline specified in Section 64 of the Act, therefore, the petitioner cannot be permitted to rectify the return beyond the statutory time limit prescribed under the GST Act. Even if the petitioner is allowed to rectify the return now, there will not be an automatic benefit of income tax credit, which the purchaser can claim. Had the petitioner detected its error prior to filing of annual return, it c
GSTR-1 for that m
error till the filing of the annual return.
20.
Supreme Court in of committing error while submitting final return hold that merely because of an error being committed by a particular company, which causes loss to the purchaser company, the provisio Act need not be interpreted to suit them. The law is settled that a person who is engaged in business has to be well versed with the provisions of law including the time frame provided under the said provisions. Both the companies, as asserted by
long and if they have committed an error, the law cannot be changed for giving them any such benefit.
21.
Court in Bharti Airtel
view taken by Bombay High Court in case (supra) and the other judgments cited by learned counsel for the petitioner.
-1 within the timeline, ITC would be permissible ould have simply rectified the same in the
onth as the common portal allows rectification of such Thus, we find the ratio of the judgment passed by Hon'ble the
Bharti Airtel's case (supra) would the respondents, are engaged in business since Keeping in view the law as settled by Hon'ble the Supreme 's case (supra), we do not find any reason to follow the
Star Engineers (I) Private Limited -15-
e is a correction
also apply at the stage
under GSTR-1. We further ns of the
's
15 of 16
22.
of the return. The writ petition is found to be without any force and is accordingly dismissed.
23.
24.
14.11.2024
vs Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable We accordingly reject the claim of the p All pending applications stand disposed of. No costs.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)
Yes/No Yes/No
-16- etitioner for correction
JUDGE
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
16 of 16