M/S.Sri Valli Jewellers vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
The petitioner has suffered the impugned assessment order dated 30.11.2023 passed in GSTIN 33ACEPV1810B1Z7/2017-18 for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2.By the impugned order, the petitioner has been called upon to pay a sum of Rs.2,83,254/- as tax, Rs.2,86,358/- as interest under Section 50(1) of the Act and penalty of Rs.28,326/- under Section 73 of the Act. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner has made a mistake in Form GSTR-3B filed under Rule 61(5) of TNGSTR Rules, 2017. It is submitted that the value of inward supply has been wrongly declared as Rs.1,74,790/-. It is submitted that sale ought to have been added to the outward supplies of the petitioner and that the petitioner has paid the tax on the outward supply. The impugned order has considered the representation of the petitioner as observed as under:- 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis “Consideration for Reply:- After considering the reply of the tax payer, the returns of the tax payer GSTR 3B and GSTR 1 were verified and the following was confirmed as below. Particulars Turnover IGST CGST SGST GSTR 1 7959246 0 119388 119388 GSTR 3B (Table 3.1a + b + c 6385618 0 95783 95783 Difference 1573628 0 23605 23605 Upon verification, it is found that the tax payer had reported Inward supplies liable to reverse charge in Table 3.1d of Rs.20,08,522/-. For that they had claimed ITC in every month without missing. But the tax payer stated that they had wrongly reported that amount in Table 3.1d, which is not acceptable because the tax payer had claimed ITC in GSTR 3B Table 4A(3). Hence, the defect was confirmed and ascertained to levy tax, interest and penalty as per the above said Show cause notice.” 3.The above observation is not clear. It calls for a proper reasoning by the respondent. The petitioner also appears to have committed a mistake in the returns filed during July 2017-2018. This was immediately after the implementation of the respective GST enactment from 01.07.2017. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Considering the same, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remitted back to the respondent to pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner is directed to give a proper explanation giving particulars of the inward and outward supplies and the mistake committed while filing the returns in Form GSTR-3B within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The entire exercise is expected to be completed by the respondent preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5.The Writ Petition stands disposed of, accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No 03.04.2024 Internet : Yes / No mm To The State Tax Officer, Ambasamudram Assessment Circle, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN, J.
mm
2024 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.