K. I. International (India) Ltd. Vs Principal Secretary (Madras High Court)
The object of Section 80 is to benefit an assessee who approaches the Commissioner for a scheme of instalments. The sole exception to the application of Section 80 is in respect of admitted tax. The language in Section 80 is ‘other than the amount due as per the liability self assessed in any return’.
The petitioner thus argues that the form GSTR I does not comprise a return and thus the exclusion that is set out under Section 80 would not apply to it. This argument is rejected in limine for the following reasons. Section 2 (37) defines ‘a return’, to mean ‘any return prescribed or otherwise required to be furnished by or under this Act or the Rules made thereunder‘.
Section 37 onwards till Section 48 falling under Chapter IX and entitled ‘Returns‘ proceeds on the basis that the various forms prescribed for filing by assessees, either setting out details of inward or outward supplies or tax credit, would all constitute returns.
Inter alia Section 39 refers to ‘a return, .. , of inward and outward supplies of goods or services or both..’. The return of outward supplies is in form GSTR 1 and is the return that has been filed by the petitioner. Thus, the argument that GSTR 1 only deals with ‘details’ and hence would not constitute a statutory return is unacceptable and contrary to the scheme of the Act.
16. Learned counsel for the petitioner also attempts to state that the impugned order under Section 80 has been passed even prior to the assessment having framed under Section 73. However, Section 80 makes no reference to an assessment at all. It only talks of turnover that has been self-assessed. In this case, the petitioner has filed the prescribed form setting forth the details of the outward supplies and the question of assessment does not arise. Incidentally, an assessment has also been made proximate to the proceedings for inspection when also the petitioner has acceded to the position that there has been suppression of sales.
Accepting the argument of the petitioner would tantamount to a situation wherein a delinquent assessee, one who has omitted to file a return of monthly turnover but has filed the prescribed return reflecting taxable sales, is allowed the benefit under Section 80, of an instalment scheme. The object of Section 80 is only to benefit an assessee who has been complaint in effecting payment of the admitted tax.
In this case, while the petitioner has filed returns it has not paid the tax and hence its barred from obtaining benefit under Section 80.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The petitioner is a Company and an assessee to State Value Added Tax under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Admittedly, it did not file returns in Form – GSTR-3B for the period September, 2018 – March, 2019. (period in question)
2. There was an inspection in the premises of the petitioner on 11.03.2019 when several discrepancies were noted. The petitioner has unequivocally admitted to those discrepancies even at the time of inspection as revealed from communication dated 22.10.2019 wherein it accedes to the position that there has been non-payment of GST for the period in question.
3. Their explanation was to the effect that the Company had incurred loss on account of the fall in the prices of imported coal and that it was holding huge stock and was compelled to sell the same at unviable prices to avoid demurrage, interest and other dues to the port at Krishnapatanam.
4. At the time of inspection, sworn statement has also been recorded wherein the petitioner has likewise admitted liability for the period in question. The abstract of Goods and Services Tax payable for the aforesaid months has been, computed as per the petitioner and as set out in that communication is as follows:-
“For the month of September, 2018:
