Vishaka Exports Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) (Madras High Court)
In the case of Vishaka Exports vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), the Madras High Court deliberated on the issue of whether discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 forms qualify as “errors apparent on the face of the record” and whether they can be rectified under Section 161 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TN-G&ST Act).
Background: Vishaka Exports, the petitioner, challenged an order dated June 22, 2022, issued by the Assistant Commissioner under Section 73 of the TN-G&ST Act. The petitioner is a registered taxpayer and the order was based on discrepancies in their GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 monthly returns for the assessment year 2018-2019. Specifically, the discrepancies pertained to turnover differences, input mismatches, and other related issues.
Legal Points Raised:
The petitioner’s counsel raised three main points against the impugned order:
- Lack of Preceding Forms GST DRC-01 and GST DRC-01A: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was not preceded by these forms, which are necessary as per the rules.
- No Show Cause Notice (SCN) Issued: The petitioner claimed that no SCN was issued prior to making the impugned order.
- Pending Rectification Petition: The petitioner had filed a rectification petition under Section 161 of the TN-G&ST Act, which was still pending.
Court’s Deliberation: The court considered the narrow scope of the petition, noting that a counter affidavit from the respondent was unnecessary due to the clear instructions and narrow focus of the case.
