M/S Rajendra Agency vs. Union Of INDIA

CW/4352/2023HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC01019950202326 April 2023Bench: VIJAY BISHNOI,PRAVEER BHATNAGAR2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Rajendra Agency, approached the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur through a writ petition. The petitioner's grievance was that due to inadvertence, incorrect entries were made in their GSTR-1 returns for the financial years 2019-20 and 2020-21. Upon approaching the respondent GST Department for rectification of these errors, the department allegedly took no action. The petitioner cited a similar case decided by the Calcutta High Court, where the department was directed to consider a representation for rectifying GSTR-1 errors. The petitioner sought a similar direction from the Rajasthan High Court.

Held

The Court held that when the petitioner-firm has filed a representation with a prayer for rectification in GSTR-1, the respondent No. 3 (Assistant Commissioner, State Tax) may consider the same. The Court was of the opinion that the representation filed by the petitioner should be considered. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner-firm on 01.10.2022 strictly in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of the order. The Court also directed that respondent No. 3 shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner-firm before passing any order on the said representation. No specific provision of the GST Act was discussed in detail, but the decision was based on the principle of considering representations filed by assessees.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent GST Department should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation for rectification of incorrect entries in GSTR-1 for the financial years 2019-20 and 2020-21, given the petitioner's submission of a representation on 01.10.2022. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that on account of inadvertence, incorrect entries were made in their GSTR-1 returns for the specified periods. They further contended that the respondent GST Department failed to take action on their request for rectification. They relied on a precedent from the Calcutta High Court, where a similar writ petition was disposed of by directing the GST Department to consider the assessee's representation for rectifying GSTR-1 errors. They prayed for a similar direction in their case. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for respondent No. 3 opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner-firm.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[2023/RJJD/012062] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4352/2023 M/s Rajendra Agency, having its registered office st Pancholiyon Ki Pol, Near Sadar Bazar, Ladnu, Nagaur through its Proprietor Rajendra Kumar Mathur S/o Anoop Chand Mathur, sged sbout 57 Years. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India, Ministry of Finance, through Secretary, Government of India, New Delhi 2. Commissioner, Goods and Service Tax, Staff Colony, PHED Colony, Nagaur (Rajasthan) 3. Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ward -II, Circle Nagaur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shridhar Mehta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Dutt Mr. Rajvendra Saraswat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

Order 26/04/2023 The petitioner-firm has approached this Court with a grievance that on account of inadvertence, the petitioner-firm has filed some incorrect entries in GSTR—1 for the year 2019-20 and 2020-21, however, when the petitioner-firm approached the respondent-GST Department for rectification in GSTR-1, the respondents-GST Department did not take any action on the request of the petitioner-firm. Learned counsel for the petitioner-firm submits that in identical situation, the Calcutta High Court has disposed of a writ

[2023/RJJD/012062] (2 of 2) [CW-4352/2023] petition filed by one of the assessees while directing the respondent-GST Department to consider the representation filed on behalf of the firm with a prayer for rectifying the error in the GSTR-1. It is, thus, prayed that similar direction may kindly be issued to the respondent-GST Department in the case in hand. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner-firm. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the material available on record, we are of the opinion that when the petitioner-firm has filed representation with a prayer for rectification in the GSTR -1, the respondent No.3 may considered the same. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.3 to consider and decide the representation (Annexure-1) filed by the petitioner-firm on 01.10.2022 strictly in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The respondent No.3 shall also provide opportunity of hearing to the petitioner-firm before passing any order on the said representation. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J 23-Dharmendra/-

Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.