Grasim Industries Ltd Vs Union of India & Ors (Gujarat High Court)
The present petition was filed under article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner has challenged the order dated25/04/2024 confirming the demand and order to recover wrongly availed ITC of IGST of Rs.20,62,94,592/- as well as confirming the demand and order to recover wrongly availed ITC of IGST of Rs.24,49,75,711/- under Section 73(1) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017 along with interest and penalty. Petitioner further pray for quashing and setting aside the order dated 04/07/2024 rejecting the application of rectification of the order dated 25/04/2024 on the ground that there was no error apparent on the face of the record.
Petitioner engaged in manufacturing of Viscose Filament Yarn and allied chemicals and transferred the same to various depots/godowns /warehouses in different states upon payment of GST. The factory of the petitioner situated at Maharashtra and having various godowns at multiple locations in the state of Gujarat including Surat. The godown situated at Surat received the goods from the factory at Maharashtra and other warehouses/ godowns across India. Petitioner received goods at the godown/warehouse at Surat on which the ITC of the GST paid is taken/claimed, including the ITC under disputes, was by way of stock transfer from other factories/units of the petitioner which are located across India. Separate GST registration was taken for Surat Godown with effect from 2018. While issuing the invoice for stock transfer of the finished goods manufactured at Maharashtra to its godown/warehouses at Surat during the FY 2018-2019, the Maharashtra Factory correctly stated new registration number on the invoices and stock transfer and the payment of GST on such stock transfer by the Maharashtra factory is not disputed by the jurisdictional GST Officers in Maharashtra. Godown at Surat also received certain goods from another warehouses in Delhi under the tax invoices disclosing new registration number after depositing the applicable GST on the said stock transfer to Surat warehouse/godown which is also not disputed by the jurisdictional authorities at Delhi. On the basis of the invoices received from the Maharashtra and Delhi, the godown situated at Surat availed the Input Tax Credit of the GST paid which was disclosed in the return filed in Form GSTR-3B under the new GSTIN registration. While filing GSTR-I for FY 2018-19, stock transfer valued at Rs.1,71,95,55,284/- made by the factory in Maharashtra and Rs.8,67,846/- made by godown/warehouse in Delhi on which total GST of Rs.20,64,50,776/- was paid, the old GSTIN was stated instead of the new GSTIN. Upon realizing the error in GSTR-1, the petitioner rectified it within the time prescribed u/s 37(3) of the GST Act. One invoice dated 28/02/2019 was inadvertently not rectified and in two invoices, there were some inadvertent errors in rectification which were issued from the factory at Maharashtra. Rectification made u/s 37(3), the same is reflected in Form-GSTR-2A of the new GSTIN Number for FY 2019-20 under the head “B2B amendment”. Rectification was reflected in GSTR-2A for the new GSTIN for the year under consideration in the auto-populated figure in the Table 8A of GSTR-9 of the petitioner.
