Case Law Details
Union of India Vs. AAP and Co. (Supreme Court)
In response to Appeal Filed by Central Government against the Gujarat High Court Judgment in the case of AAP And Co. Vs Union of India, Hon’ble Supreme Court stays the Gujarat HC judgement which states that GSTR-3B is not a return under Section 39 of Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.
Earlier moot question before the High Court was , whether the return in Form GSTR-3B is a return required to be filed under Section 39 of the CGST Act/GGST Act?
High Court has held that Section 39(1) of the CGST/GGST Act provides that every taxpayer, except a few special categories of persons, shall furnish a monthly return in such form and manner as may be prescribed. Rule 61 of the CGST Rules/GGST Rules prescribes the form and manner of submission of monthly return. Sub-rule 1 of Rule 61 of the CGST Rules/GGST Rules provides that the return required to be filed in terms of Section 39(1) of the CGST/GGST Act is to be furnished in Form GSTR-3.
High Court further held that It would be apposite to state that initially it was decided to have three returns in a month, i.e. return for outward supplies i.e. GSTR-1 in terms of Section 37, return for inward supplies in terms of Section 38, i.e. GSTR-2 and a combined return in Form GSTR-3. However, considering technical glitches in the GSTN portal as well as difficulty faced by the tax payers it was decided to keep filing of GSTR-2 and GSTR-3 in abeyance. Therefore, in order to ease the burden of the taxpayer for some time, it was decided in the 18th GST Council meeting to allow filing of a shorter return in Form GSTR-3B for initial period. It was not introduced as a return in lieu of return required to be filed in Form GSTR-3. The return in Form GSTR-3B is only a temporary stop gap arrangement till due date of filing the return in Form GSTR-3 is notified.
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT
Issue notice on the prayer for interim relief, application for condonation of delay as well as on the Special Leave Petition.
Dasti, in addition, is permitted.
Mr. Devendra Singh, Advocate waives notice for the sole respondent.
As prayed, two weeks’ time is granted to the learned counsel for the respondent to file reply affidavit.
List the matter after two weeks.
In the meantime, the operation of the impugned judgment and order shall remain stayed.
is this judgment supports the recovery of late fees?