Tag: Rectification

No Difference in Taxes as per the Portal – Application for Rectification allowed to be made

Citation:

AAA Impex vs. Commissioner of State GST and VAT, Department of Trade and Taxes

High Court of Delhi

[2025] 171 taxmann.com 144 (Delhi)[15-01-2025]

Facts of the Case:

  1. An Order u/s. 73 dated 18/08/24 was issued demanding tax, stating to be based on failure to reconcile the returns submitted.
  2. Petitioner submitted that no notice was served on them before the Order and the notice might have been placed in the “Additional Notice and Orders” Tab.
  3. Petitioner further submits that perusal of the GST Portal itself would prove that there is no difference in either CGST, SGST or IGST.
  4. Department submits that the same was placed under “Notice and Orders” Tab, afte rectification of Portal.

Held that:

  1. Considering the facts and submissions, the Petitioner is allowed to make an application for rectification, stating the details submitted herein and
  2. The department is suggested to examine the the same and if found correct, it is suggested to take appropriate action.

Relevant Provisions – Section 161 – Application for Rectification:

Below Link contains a summary and Text of Section 161.

Section 161 – Rectification of Error Apparent on the Face of the Record

Ingredients of Section 74 are not satisfied – Assessment Order is Set Aside

Citation:

Balaji Electrical & Hardwares Vs. State Tax Officer (ST) – WP No. 3458 of 2024

High Court of Madras

[2024] 159 taxmann.com 562 (Madras)

Facts:

  1. Assessment Order dated 14.07.2023 and Consequential Attachment Notice (Link below contains provisions relating to Provisional Attachment) dated 21.12.2023 were passed.
  2. Assessee states that he was filing all the required GST Returns and was unaware of the intimation, Show Cause Notice and the attachment order until the Attachment order was communicated to him, whereupon, he has filed a letter for Rectification dated 03.01.2024 (under Section 161 – Error apparent on the face of the record – Link below contains provisions relating to Section 161).

Arguments of Petitioner:

  1. Order is issued under Section 74, but the requirements for the same have not been fulfilled – no allegations of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts.
  2. Order is completely unreasoned – No Shortfall in GSTR-1 Vs. GSTR-3B
  3. 10% of Tax Demand will be deposited if provided another Opportunity before the assessing officer.

Arguments of Department:

  1. The petitioner was provided sufficient opportunities by issuing an intimation, SCN and a Personal hearing.
  2. Principles of Natural Justice were adhered to. No case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution.
  3. The Assessment Order states that the petitioner did not comply with the Tax Demand or file any objections. Hence, it cannot be said that Opportunity was not provided to respond to the tax demand.

Decision of the Hon’ble High Court:

  1. On examining the Impugned Order and the SCN, it is noticeable that the order is unreasoned.
  2. The Assessment Order and Consequential Attachment Notice are quashed subject to the condition that 10% of the Disputed Tax is deposited within 2 weeks.
  3. Assessing officer is directed to pass a fresh assessment order within 2 months after providing Personal hearing.