Give GSTR1 a chance to improve even after the deadline

- Sales Tax ઃ Soham Mashruwala

Amendments under the GST Act will continue to be made and if possible the purpose of simplifying the law will be taken into account to remove the Jadbaslak provision. And again, these would mean that you have to spend for these processes. For example, if for some reason the supplier makes a mistake in writing the recipient's GST registration number while filing his GSTR1, the bill will not appear in GSTR2B as per the existing provision and the tax claim will be falsified. Moreover, if the bill is not amended on the GST portal by September after the end of the financial year, the recipient will not be entitled to the tax. In such a case, can the GST portal impose such a time limit and can the benefit of the tax invalid be invalidated by making a mistake? In this regard, the Madras High Court has directed Pentacle Plant Machinery Pvt. Lee. (WP No. 1022/2020) An interesting judgment has been given on February 8, 2021 which is discussed in today's article.

The fact of the case

The applicant filled in his GSTR1 form at that time and there was an error in writing the GST registration number of a customer. The applicant had to write the customer's Andhra Pradesh GST registration number instead of the customer's Uttar Pradesh state registration number. This error was made by the applicant in the form GSTR1 dated February 2016. This error was made to the applicant by his client on 17.8.2018. In addition, there was no doubt that the goods were supplied under the bill and received by the customer. In addition, the tax invoice also had the customer's GST registration number from the state of Andhra Pradesh. A writ was sought by the petitioner seeking relief that he could amend these bills which should not invalidate the benefit of tax to the customer due to man's error.

Petitioner's argument

It was argued by the applicant that the facility is not available on the GST portal at the time when the customer informs him to correct the details of the bill. In addition, today the government has not provided the facility for filling GSTR2 form and GSTR1A form. Moreover, in the present case, the man has made a mistake and no intention has been shown in the wrong details sheet. With all this in mind, when the correct GST number is written in the bill and the customer also receives the supply of goods, it is imperative to make this amendment and it should be facilitated.

Account argument

It was argued by the government that the facility to amend the GSTR1 form was given to the applicant till March 31, 2018 for the financial year 2016-17 and yet this facility was not availed. Because of this the writ of the applicant is liable to be rejected.

Judgment of Madras High Court

The Madras High Court noted that such a parallel case appeared in Sun Dykem (2020 VIL 524). In the present case there is no dispute regarding the supply of goods by the department, there is no dispute over the supply of goods to the designated customer and there is no dispute over the fact that Form GSTR2 and Form GSTR1A have not been notified today.

To the applicant dt. It was found out only on 13.2.2018 that in the GSTR1 form for the month of February 2016, there was an error in writing the GST number of the customer in 3 bills.

In addition, the High Court also noted that the mistake of just writing the GST number could not be rejected. In the present case no tax benefit can be invalidated due to actual error of man and it is imperative to give the applicant a chance to amend the bill when the government has not provided facility to pay GSTR2 and GSTR1A. Thus ruled in favor of the petitioner and ordered to facilitate the amendment of GSTR1 within eight weeks.