The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in M/S Deepak Print v. Union of India [R/Special Civil Application No. 18157 of 2019, decided on March 9, 2021] directed the revenue department to allow the rectification of entries in the Form GSTR-3B return for the Month of May, 2019, on account of genuine bonafide human error.
M/S Deepak Print (the Petitioner) is a proprietor engaged in the business of printing of dress materials etc. That the Petitioner had submitted the return of his business in the month of May, 2019 through the online process, i.e., the GST Portal. The Petitioner, inadvertently, in the course of making entries in the Form GSTR-3B for the month of May, 2019, wrongly uploaded the entries of M/s. Deepak Process instead of M/s. Deepak Print i.e., the Petitioner.
Subsequently, the Petitioner preferred a representation in writing addressed to the Nodal Officer, SGST Office, Rajkot (“Respondent”) dated June 25, 2019, for which no response has been provided till date.
Being aggrieved, the Petitioner has filed this writ seeking to edit and upload actual entries in Form GSTR-3B for the Month of May 2019 which is at the submission stage and to modify the conditions and rules mentioned in the Annexure-A of Circular No. 26/26/2017-GST, dated December 29, 2017, by which a registered person can edit any error if occurred during submitting/offsetting the Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) and before filing of the Form GSTR-3B return.
Whether the Petitioner is entitled to seek rectification of Form GSTR-3B for the month of May, 2019?
The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in R/Special Civil Application No. 18157 of 2019, decided on March 9, 2021 held as under:
Recently, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in Pentacle Plant Machineries Pvt. Ltd. v. Office of the GST Council and ors. [W.P. No. 1022 of 2020, decided on February 23, 2021] has allowed the assessee to correct a “human error” while filing Form GSTR-1 return, wherein the assessee mentioned the GST number of the purchaser in Uttar Pradesh instead of the GST number of the purchaser in Andhra Pradesh and realized only when the recipient notified it of the rejection of credit. Relied on its earlier decision in Sun Dye Chem v. The Assistant Commissioner [W.P. No. 29676 of 2019, decided on October 6, 2020] wherein it was held that the assessee should not be mulcted with any liability on account of the bonafide, human error and must be permitted to correct the same. Directed the Revenue to enable amendment to Form GSTR-1 with all consequences thereto, within a period of 8 weeks.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon.