Bar Code India Limited Vs Union of India and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Parties and Basic Details
FedEx Express Transportation & Supply Chain Services (India) Private Limited (Receiver of GST ITC i.e. Purchaser)
1. Issue: Whether the petitioner i.e. Seller could rectify/amend the GST number of a purchaser in GSTR-1 for invoices raised in May 2021, after the statutory timeline for corrections had expired. Petitioner company (BARCODE INDIA LIMITED) issued three invoices to the purchaser (FedEx) for financial year 2021-2022 where erroneously at the time of filing of GSTR-1 return, the petitioner 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.
i. Invoice Issued on FY 2021-2022, 13.05.2021 total of Three Invoices
ii. Actual Place of Supply: Delhi having Delhi GSTIN no of FedEx
-
- Wrong Place of Supply: Mumbai having Mumbai GSTIN no of FedEx
- Important Section of GST Act, 2017 cited in Judgement: Section 16 (4); Sections 37 (1); 37 (3) and 39 and 44 of the Act
Brief of the case and
1. Purchaser notified the error to them (Barcode India) somewhere in the month of April 2023 as they found difficulty to avail GST input tax credit.
2. Petitioner sent letter dated 18-08-2023 to Respondent i.e. Revenue praying for allowing them to make necessary amendments in their return relating to the three invoices issued on 13.05.2021.
3. Revenue (Department), however, rejected the prayer i.e. Barcode India Ltd. On account of being no provision to make amendments after the time period laid down under rules has expired.
4. Revenue, clarifies that last date for rectification of error or omission in terms of Section 37(3) of the Act for the A. Y. 2021-2022 was 30.11.2022. Department also argued that the petitioner ought to have been cautioned enough in checking its monthly returns and prior to filing of annual return, it could have easily rectified in GSTR-1 as the common portal allows rectification of such errors till the filing of annual return.
5. ITC claims by the purchaser were also time-barred under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act as there is no benefit of amending the Invoices.
6. Department also argued that Allowing amendments beyond the deadline would disrupt the tax framework and have cascading effects.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the issue as raised in the present petition stands finally adjudicated by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Union of India (UOI) vs Bharti Airtel Limited and others (2022) 4 SCC 328.
In the Above cited case of Bharti Airtel Limited, Hon’ble the Supreme Court cited Section 16 of the Act and held as under: –
“48. A priori, despite such an express mechanism provided by Section 39(9) read with Rule 61, it was not 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 submitted in Form GSTR3-B for the relevant period in which the error had 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-assessment 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 chaotic situation and collapse of tax administration of Union, States and Union Territories. Resultantly, unilaterally carry out assessee cannot be permitted to rectification of his returns submitted electronically in Form GSTR-3B, which inevitably would affect the obligations and liabilities of other stakeholders, because of the cascading effect in their electronic records.
49. As noted earlier, process happens on its the matching and correction own as per the mechanism specified in Sections 37 and 38, after which Form GSTR- 3 is generated for the purposes of submission of returns; and once it is submitted, any changes thereto may have cascading effect. Therefore, the law permits rectification of errors and omissions only at the initial stages of Forms GSTR-1 and manner. It is a different GSTR-3, but in the specified dispensation provided than the one in pre-GST period, which did not have the provision of auto-populated records and entries.”
2. Court stated that as soon as the supplier files GSTR-1 mentioning the Invoice amount, date, rate, place of supply and the GST Number of buyer, the system automatically generate GSTR-2A of the recipient of the goods/services, which is one of the basic elements for claiming ITC through GSTR-3B.
