Goods and Services Tax Updates- Recent High Court Judgements in favour of the Assessee

1. The Hon’ble H.C of Delhi allows the processing of refund application of the assesse which was declared deficient by revenue authority

In the case of AB Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax (Delhi High Court), (2023) 157 taxmann.com 218 (Delhi) (21-11-2023)

It was held that application for refund of unutilized input tax credit in respect of zero rated supplies could not be rejected as deficient if it was complete in terms of rule 89(2) of CGST Rules, 2017. The Hon’ble Authority directed the concerned officer to issue the acknowledgment in terms of Rule 90 of the CGST Rules, 2017 and process the petitioner’s application for refund in accordance with law. Earlier, revenue authority issued communication stating that application was deficient and that the assessee would be required to file fresh application for refund. However, the said Communication by revenue authority did not specify deficiencies in application.

2. The Hon’ble H.C of Kerala permitted rectification of GSTR-3B wherein the assesse has availed ITC of IGST instead of CGST and SGST.

In the case of Chukkath Krishnan Praveen Vs. State of Kerala, Dy. Commissioner, State Tax Officer, Asstt. State Tax Officer and Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (Kerala High Court) (08-12-2023)

In this case the petitioner, a registered dealer filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner requested for rectification of mistakes in form GSTR-3B (reporting of IGST instead of CGST and SGST), refund of IGST input tax credit and adjust it towards CGST and SGST liability and reconsideration of assessment orders.

The Hon’ble H.C held in favour of the assesse.  This judgement highlights the significance of rectifying errors in GSTR-3B filing.