Case Law Details
AAA Impex Through Its Partner Mr. Rajeev Gupta Vs Commissioner of State GST And VAT (Delhi High Court)
In AAA Impex Through Its Partner Mr. Rajeev Gupta vs. Commissioner of State GST and VAT, the Delhi High Court addressed whether an assessee could rectify GST returns when the final assessment order was allegedly based on reconciliation failures. The petitioner challenged the assessment order issued under Section 73 of the GST Act, arguing that the net tax payable had been miscalculated due to a failure to reconcile returns. The assessee contended that no discrepancies existed in CGST, SGST, or IGST, as evidenced by the GST portal.
The petitioner further claimed that no prior notice had been served before the final order, suggesting that it may have been placed in the “Additional Notices and Orders” tab rather than being directly accessible. The respondents, however, maintained that the notice had been properly uploaded under the “Notices and Orders” tab after corrective measures had been implemented on the GST portal. A key contention of the petitioner was that the GST portal itself showed no differences in tax liabilities, supporting the claim that the assessment was erroneous.
The Delhi High Court, acknowledging the petitioner’s claim, allowed AAA Impex to file an application for rectification. The court directed the GST officer to review the application and independently verify the details presented. If the officer found that no discrepancies existed, appropriate corrective action was to be taken. This decision reinforces the right of taxpayers to seek rectification when they believe assessment errors have occurred due to reconciliation issues.
This ruling aligns with judicial precedents where courts have emphasized due process and procedural fairness in GST assessments. The case underscores the importance of accurate reconciliation and provides relief to businesses facing technical or administrative discrepancies in tax assessments.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. The writ petitioner has impugned the final order dated 18 August 2024 referable to Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [“CGST Act”] and whereby the net tax payable as computed by the respondent appears to be based on a failure to reconcile the returns that were submitted.
2. When the writ petition was originally entertained, the petitioner had contended that prior to the passing of the final order, no notice had been served and that the same was perhaps placed in the „Additional Notices and Orders‟ tab.
3. However, and from the status report that has been submitted in these proceedings, we find that it is the case of the respondents that the notice which preceded the final order under Section 73 was placed in the „Notices and Orders‟ tab since by that time appropriate corrective measures had been taken on the portal thus ensuring that all notices were placed under the principal tab and being viewable.
4. Faced with the above, learned counsel for the writ petitioner then drew our attention to the averments made in the writ petition in ground (E) and in terms of which it is contended that a perusal of the online Goods and Services Tax [“GST”] Portal itself would establish that no difference existed under the head of CGST, State GST and Integrated GST.
5. In view of the aforesaid position which is taken, we permit the writ petitioner to move an appropriate application for rectification bringing to the attention of the GST officer, the details which are alluded to and referred to hereinabove. The same may be duly ascertained and examined by the officer independently and in case the stand as struck is found to be correct, appropriate action may be taken thereafter.
6. The writ petition shall stand disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
Author Bio
