Page 56 - GSTL_16th July 2020_Vol. 38_Part 3

294 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
follow the instructions/guidelines mentioned in paragraph 3 of Circular dated
29-12-2017 (Annexure-“F” to the petition). But it is clarified by the Government
of India at paragraph 3 of the circular that the GST Council has decided to keep
in abeyance the scheme of correction/amendment of errors in GSTR-3B at the
time of filing GSTR-2 and GSTR-3. Consequently, though advised by the jurisdic-
tional Deputy Commissioner to do so, the petitioner could not have followed the
instructions/guidelines mentioned in paragraph 3 of this circular. As a result of
the petitioner’s follow up for about eighteen months, now a decision has been
communicated with the approval of the Principal Commissioner, Ahmedabad-
North, informing the petitioner that the Senior Vice President, GSTN has in-
formed that functionality of modifying GSTR-3B is not available because there is
no such process defined under law. The petitioner is advised to follow the in-
structions/guidelines mentioned in paragraph 3 of the Circular dated 29-12-2017.
On enquiry by the petitioner as to in what manner instructions/guideline men-
tioned in paragraph 3 of the above referred Circular should be followed, the peti-
tioner has been informed by the Officers that the petitioner’s case would fall un-
der Common Error-1 of Annexure to the above Circular, and as clarified for cases
of “Liability was under reported”, the petitioner should pay the liability of tax
with interest.
2.19 In the aforesaid factual background, the situation that still prevails
is that a formal entry in the petitioner’s electronic liability register for discharg-
ing tax liability of August, 2017 is still not made in the system though the peti-
tioner had paid the entire tax liability of August, 2017 by way of cash payment
aggregating to Rs. 114.51 crores (rounded off) and that of Rs. 14.12 crores
(rounded off) from legally availed ITC. Though true and full information about
the tax liability and also its payment in respect of August, 2017 stands reflected
in the return furnished in Form GSTR-1, the other return in Form GSTR-3B
shows zero liability and also nothing about discharging the actual tax liability of
August, 2017, the Unique Identification Number relating to discharge of such tax
liability in August, 2017 is still not made in the System, that is, on the common
portal, in respect of the petitioner’s electronic liability register. It is the case of the
petitioner that despite having paid the entire tax liability of August, 2017 within
the time limit prescribed under law, as the petitioner is still considered as a de-
faulter as regards tax liability of August, 2017 exposing the petitioner to several
consequences and there is no proper response from the respondents, the peti-
tioner has approached this Court seeking the reliefs noted hereinabove.
3. During the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner had filed
an application being Civil Application No. 1 of 2019 in the captioned writ peti-
tion, praying that the petitioner be permitted to file manually GSTR-3B for Au-
gust, 2017 with the correct and true details and the respondents be directed to
accept and acknowledge such GSTR-3B manually filed by the petitioner for Au-
gust, 2017. The petitioner further sought a direction to the respondents to give
effect to the details contained in GSTR-3B for August, 2017 filed manually and to
indicate discharge of the petitioner’s GST liability for August, 2017 in the elec-
tronic liability register as contemplated under Rule 88(2) of the CGST Rules,
2017.
4. Vide order dated 7-5-2019, the application was allowed by permit-
ting the petitioner to file GSTR-3B for August, 2017 manually, with correct and
true details and the respondents were directed to accept and acknowledge such
GSTR-3B manually filed by the petitioner for August, 2017.
GST LAW TIMES  16th July 2020  56