From the date of implementation of GST regime, the Government has mandated filing of GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B only. During this period, registered persons were allowed to take input tax credit (ITC) based on figure reported in GSTR-3B. Although filing of GSTR-2 was kept in abeyance but, by virtue of some provisions of GST legislation, it is necessary for them to reconcile the ITC claimed in GSTR-3B with auto populated GSTR-2A.

Following are some aspect which supports the above statement-

Tax has been actually paid to the Government:

Section 16(2) of Central GST Act, 2017, inter alia, include one condition for ITC which reads as under-

“Subject to the provisions of section 41, the tax charged in respect of such supply has been actually paid to the government, either by cash or through utilisation of input tax credit admissible in respect of the said supply.”

Under GST regime, supplier shall furnish details of outward supplies (party-wise) in GSTR-1 on the basis of which output tax liability shall be determined and be paid through GSTR-3 or GSTR-3B (at present). Details furnished by supplier will be reflected to recipient in GSTR-2A on the basis of recipient shall decide the input tax credit available to him.

Therefore, unless supplier has reported supply in GSTR-1 i.e. reflected in GSTR-2A, it may not be considered as actually paid to the Government.

Note: Although supplier may say that he has reported supply in GSTR-3B but unless same is considered in GSTR-1, for recipient, practically it would be difficult to justify about ITC so claimed.

Difference in ITC claimed and ITC reflected in GSTR-2A to be added to liability of recipient:

Section 42(5) of Central GST Act, 2017 states that the amount i.e. mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-2A, in respect of which any discrepancies is communicated and not rectified by supplier, shall be added to the output tax liability of the recipient.

The above provision is very clear that wherever any excess ITC claimed is found which is not reflected by supplier in his GSTR-1, shall be added to liability of recipient. In order words, this cast responsibility on recipient to ensure that ITC claimed by him is being properly reported by the supplier.

Based on above, we can conclude that recipient must ensure that all ITC claimed by him is properly reflected in his GSTR-2A. In case of any discrepancies found, same shall be promptly communicated to supplier so that he can report the same in his coming GSTR-1.

Last date to claim ITC for F.Y. 2017-18: 20 October 2018 (Due of GSTR-3B of September)

Section 16(4) of Central GST Act, 2017 put restriction on recipient to claim ITC after filing of return for the month of September 2018. Thus, where any supplier has corrected reporting in GSTR-1 post Sept 2018 then also recipient may face difficulty in claim such ITC as same was not reflected in GSTR-2A till September 2018.

It shall be noted that, being practical experience, wherever supplier report any prior period supplies in current period’s GSTR-1, such supplies gets reflected in GSTR-2A of current period and not in period to which it belongs. For Example, when invoice dated 10 February 2018 is reported by supplier in GSTR-1 of August 2018 then such invoice will reflect in GSTR-2A of August 2018 and not February 2018.

Therefore, any supply reported post September month’s return may not be considered as actually paid to the Government till September 2018 and accordingly may not be eligible for ITC on account of non-fulfilment of one of condition of section 16(2) of Central GST Act, 2017.


Where recipient possessed tax invoice and also had made payment to supplier, he may justify his claim even when supplier has not reported or reported but after September 2018 such supply. However, it will certainly lead to litigation which can be avoid by taking pre-caution at present. Therefore, registered person may undertake reconciliation exercise and get the discrepancies resolves by with supplier before end of September 2018.


Above view expressed is of my personal, based on understanding of legislation and practical experience thereto. A person may have difference view on the subject matter and may not subscribe to this view. Further, this shall in no manner be considered as legal opinion or advise as it is just for educational purpose.

Role of TDS on Property Purchase

Author Bio

Qualification: CA in Practice
Company: N/A
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra, IN
Member Since: 25 Aug 2018 | Total Posts: 2

My Published Posts

More Under Goods and Services Tax


  1. samuel says:

    I do not know the Indian Government really thinks before implementing GST, THE INDIAN GOV. BROUGHT THIS GST, AND IT IS NOT RECIPIENT JOB TO ASK SUPPLIER TO MAKE HIM FILE HIS GSTR1 RETURNS. It is the govt job to somehow make it, should not push this hard to business people, TOTAL FAILURE OF INDIAN GOVERNMENT ON ANY PROJECTS

  2. Chirag Bhandari (Taxtra Consultants) says:

    As suggested by Sandeep it’s recommended to undertake reconciliation exercise and get the discrepancies resolves. This helps in knowing the unclaimed credit and also the defaulting vendors on a timely basis.
    There are software available in the market which helps in GSTR 2A reconciliation.
    Currently, we are have procured software from Firmway Services . for reconciling the GSTR 2A data.

  3. chandra says:

    There is a recent notification to the effect that credit matching through 2A is only for reference purposes and not mandatory.
    If so, credit cannot be denied because 2A credit is not seen. Is that right??

    Can you share that notification please??

  4. Rajkumar says:

    Due to political reasons govt witdrwan Gstr2 monthly return and now give us less then two month reconcile the gstr2a.It is totally unfair.. and uacctabe

  5. R.S\URESH KUMAR says:

    It is an highly harassment nature making receipient responsible for non filing by the supplier, due to failure of GSTR2 thro portal public should not be made responsible for this case, and leaving short time and making GSTR2 indirectly compulsory is highly not appreciable

  6. G R Aithal, says:

    `It is very much wrong to stipulate, that if a supplier defaults to pay GST collected from receipient to Govt. account, that amount shall be added to output tax liability of the receipient. This will amount to double payment of GST to once to supplier for onward remittance to Govt. and again adding up the same to his output liability if the suppliers defaults. How can receipient force the supplier if a defaults. Supplier is only responsible for the payment of such GST, when the receipient is having physical tax invoice and payment proof thereof.

    Otherwise, filing of GSTR 2 shall be reintroduced, where the receipient will have the option to accept, reject, modify and add invoices in respect of each of his supplier. This arrangement was there for a month, ie, July, 2017. Subsequesntly, for the reasons unknown to us it was withdrawn.

    Thus, for the failure of GST regime to monitor the invoices and matching the same, making the poor receipients responsible for payment of double tax, if his supplier fails to comply with the payment obligattions. It is pity.

  7. Mani.M says:

    Is it compulsory that invoice number should also be matched? In our sales return there is some difference in the serial number of the invoice. Purchased who is under B2B asks us why there is difference in the number. Please guide us

  8. Rajesh Advani says:

    I feel that the last date of claiming ITC is 10th October 18 as the supplier has to disclose the supply in GSTR1 of SepteSeptember 18.

  9. rm says:

    krishna how practicing ca/cma should cover their liability for gst audit report -looking at elaborate accounting of output/input pan india- state wise, business place wise, mergers etc and volumes of reconciliations formats in gst-form9c and annul returns under form 9,9a.b.c.d etc lapses if any being new law and time for audit will be less but certification will carry risk of liability under gst law.what should be the ideal insurance cover for audit risk and if this can be claimed from client.if the volume of lapses are huge in volume of lapses/deviations/liability – the client will state innocence of gst law and whole gst impact will be on the auditor certifying gst returns/reports with books of accounts. Pray the rakshabhadhan for gst certifying auditors does not turn into hand cuffs since web portal based gst is dangerous to comply with high risk to reviewer/auditor from all directions

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

June 2021