Case Law Details
Brothers Trade Links Vs State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court)
Kerala High Court held that the petitioner should approach the appellate authority under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act for getting permission to correct mistake in Form GSTR-3B.
Facts- The petitioner is a registered dealer under the CGST/SGST Act. The petitioner was issued Notice in Form GST ASMT-10 for tax period F.Y. 2017-18 stating that during the scrutiny of the return certain discrepancies were noticed. It was also stated that the petitioner has utilised ITC greater than 5 times cash. There was mismatch between GSTR1 and GSR3B for an amount of Rs.6,12,127.88.
As reply was not filed by the petitioner, 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. 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 submitted his reply to the GST DRC-01A by Ext.P8. After considering the said reply, the notice u/s. 74(1) of CGST, 2017, has issued to the petitioner. The petitioner claimed that the mistakes committed in affording return for February 2018 were rectified by filing GSTR9 and GSTR9C and were examined by the assessing authority. 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 the connected tax liability with interest while filing either GSTR 9 or GSTR 9C and therefore, notice under Section 74 of GST Act was incorporated.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
