• Notification Date: 04-05-2024
• Notification No: N/A

Adjudication of Discrepancies in GSTR 3B vs GSTR 2A ignoring Supplier and CA Certificates with Invoice Details: Madras High Court quashes GST Demand Order

The Madras High Court sets aside the Goods and Services Tax (GST) order as Certificates from Supplier and CA providing invoice details leading to Disparity in GSTR 3B & GSTR 2A not Considered by the authorities. An order dated 29.12.2023 has been contested through a writ petition, raised from a Show Cause Notice (SCN) issued to the petitioner on 29.09.2023. 

The petitioner’s response to the notice, submitted on 16.10.2023, cited a discrepancy between their GSTR 3B return and the auto-populated GSTR 2A, attributing it to a supplier’s delayed filing of GSTR 1 for one invoice. However, technical issues prevented the petitioner from uploading the reply on the portal, leading to the issuance of the impugned order. Counsel for the petitioner referenced the submitted reply, along with certificates obtained from the supplier and their Chartered Accountant. Despite the petitioner’s efforts, a recent rejection of a rectification petition ensued. 

Representing the respondent, Mr. T.N.C. Kaushik, Additional Government Pleader, argued that the petitioner had ample opportunity to contest the tax demand but failed to submit a reply through the GST portal. The petitioner presented additional evidence, including a certificate from Fivestar Impex India Private Limited dated 31.10.2023 and a certificate from Prabhakaran & Associates, Chartered Accountant, detailing an invoice dated 01.11.2017. These documents were not considered while issuing the impugned order, warranting judicial intervention. 
 
Consequently, a Single bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy set aside the order dated 29.12.2023 and remanded the matter to the respondent for reconsideration. The petitioner was granted 15 days to submit a reply to the show cause notice, enclosing all relevant documents. Upon receipt, the respondent was directed to provide the petitioner with a reasonable opportunity for a personal hearing and subsequently issue a fresh order within two months.