Page 54 - GSTL_16th July 2020_Vol. 38_Part 3

292 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
ated on the common portal (viz. the System), thereby signifying that the petition-
er has paid the tax for August, 2017.
2.9 For completing the transaction, a Unique Identification Number re-
lating to discharge of any liability is to be indicated in the corresponding entry in
the electronic liability register. This procedural requirement of sub-rule (2) of
Rule 88 of the CGST Rules is, however, not completed in the petitioner’s case
because of a glitch and ultimate crashing down of the common portal system in
September, 2017.
2.10 All the above referred details about CPIN, CIN and even BRN ap-
pear on both the challans dated 19-9-2017; and thus the payment of tax aggregat-
ing to Rs. 114.51 crores (rounded off) in cash towards the petitioner’s tax liability
of August, 2017 is not under any dispute or doubt. The remaining amount of
Rs. 14.12 crores (rounded off) has been paid from ITC legally available to the pe-
titioner, and debit entry of such ITC has also been made in the credit ledger of
the petitioner. In the present proceedings, there is no dispute or doubt about
payment of tax from ITC also.
2.11 It is further the case of the petitioner that the entire tax liability of
August, 2017, having been discharged by 19th September, 2017, the petitioner
proposed to furnish GSTR-3B on 20th September, 2017; but the common portal
was not running properly due to heavy load because millions of registered per-
sons were trying to upload their returns and the common portal which was in-
troduced only in July, 2017 was not capable of taking such a huge load. Conse-
quently, the petitioner’s efforts to upload GSTR-3B on 20th September, 2017
failed. On the next day, that is, on 21st September, 2017, the System crashed. Due
to this unfortunate turn of events, the System accepted the petitioner’s GSTR-3B
on 21-9-2017, but the information and details in all the columns of this return
were shown as “zero”, though the payment of tax liability of the month had also
been fully made by the petitioner.
2.12 Since GSTR-3B was uploaded on the common portal in the above
manner, the requirement of sub-rule (2) of Rule 88 of the CGST Rules, that is,
indicating the Unique Identification Number relating to discharge of the liability
in the corresponding entry in the electronic liability register has not been made in
the System, which operates on its own, namely that, the petitioner has no access
to make any entry, etc. in the System, and consequently not in the electronic lia-
bility register maintained under Rule 85 of the CGST Rules also.
2.13 The petitioner, therefore, immediately informed the Assistant
Commissioner in charge of its unit vide a letter dated 21-9-2017 about the pay-
ment and discharging duty liability for August, 2017 but inability to correct
GSTR-3B return submitted on GSTM portal. The office of the Assistant Commis-
sioner has made an endorsement on this letter advising the petitioner to ap-
proach the Help Desk to sort out the issue.
2.14 According to the petitioner, for August, 2017, it has thereafter fur-
nished a return in form GSTR-1 as prescribed under Rule 59(1) of the CGST
Rules. All required details, including the tax liability and also its payment, are
furnished under GSTR-1 by the petitioner.
2.15 The petitioner’s representative thereafter visited the Help Desk at
GST Bhavan, Ambawadi, and informed the Officers there about the above diffi-
culty in respect of GSTR-3B. The petitioner’s representative was, however, in-
formed that any error in GSTR-3B would be taken care of when GSTR-2 and
GST LAW TIMES  16th July 2020  54