Case Law Details
Usha Bagri Vs Assistant Commissioner (Kerala High Court)
In a recent judgment, the Kerala High Court addressed a crucial issue regarding the correction of documents submitted along with VAT returns. The case, Usha Bagri Vs Assistant Commissioner, involves a dealer in construction materials who inadvertently uploaded an incorrect stock inventory. This article delves into the background of the case, the legal arguments presented, and the court’s decision.
The petitioner, Usha Bagri, operates as a registered dealer specializing in marbles, granite, and tiles. During the submission of annual returns for the fiscal year 2014-15, she mistakenly uploaded a statement of closing stock dated 28-05-2015 instead of the required date of 31-03-2015. Upon realizing the error, Usha Bagri promptly notified the Assessing Authority and filed a request for correction.
The Assessing Authority responded with notices (Exts.P6 to P8), indicating procedural issues related to the submission under Rule 22(3)(v) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, 2005. The core contention was whether the rules allowed for the correction of documents uploaded alongside VAT returns, specifically the stock inventory.
The court deliberated on Rule 22(4A), which permits dealers to revise returns in case of detected errors. However, the rule appeared silent on whether corrections could extend to documents uploaded alongside the returns. The petitioner argued for an interpretation of Rule 22(4A) that would encompass corrections to uploaded documents, highlighting the practical necessity and fairness of such an allowance.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
