Bonafide errors in GST returns should not obstruct rectification where no revenue loss occurs, promoting accuracy and fairness under GST provisions.

ORDER :

1. In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

"1. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the Respondent No.2 and 3 authorities to permit the petitioner to carry out necessary amendments to the petitioners GSTR-1 returns in GSTIN 29AAFFH2582PIZQ for the period June 2022 - September 2022 (Annexures-B, B1, B2 And B3) so as to enable the respondent No.4 to claim ITC in accordance with law.

2. Pass any such other orders and directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner is a registered taxpayer, who filed returns in GSTR-1 returns for the tax period from June 2022 to September 2022. It is the specific contention of the petitioner that in the said returns, the petitioner inadvertently uploaded the GSTIN of respondent No.5, which is at Kerala instead of Tamil Nadu Branch, which is at Chennai, as a result of which, the respondent No.4 was not in a position to avail the Input Tax Credit. In this regard, it is contented that the petitioner was completely unaware of the said mistake that had crept in the GSTR-1 returns, till the respondent No.4 addressed an email dated 28.12.2023 to the petitioner inviting its attention regarding the aforesaid error in the GSTR-1 returns and consequently, withheld a sum of Rs.71,26,070/- together with interest of Rs.19,45,219/- from the bills payable to the petitioner. Petitioner contends that after coming to know about the said mistake, the petitioner requested the respondent Nos.1 to 3 vide Annexure-H dated 03.04.2024, requesting permission to rectify/revise the returns already filed for the aforesaid period. Since the respondent Nos.1 to 3 did not take any steps in this regard, petitioner is before this court by way of the present petition seeking directions to the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to permit rectification of the GSTR-1 returns by placing reliance upon the following judgments:

1. NRB Bearings Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of State Tax and Ors. . W.P. No. 10771/2023.

2. Sun Dye Chem vs. Assistant Commissioner . (2021) 84 GSTR 237 (Mad).

3. Pentacle Plant Machineries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Office of GST Council and Ors. , (2022) 107 GSTR 23 (Mad).

4. Star Engineers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors.. (2024)123 GSTR 216 (Bom).

5. Aberdare Technologies Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs & Ors. (W.P.No.7912/2024)

3. The respondent No.4 and respondent No.5 have filed separate statement of objections contesting the petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5.

5. In the case of NRB Bearings Ltd. vs. Commissioner of State Tax (W.P.No.10771/2023 disposed of 14.02.2024), under identical circumstances, the High Court of Bombay held as under:

“JUDGMENT

1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, heard finally.

2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying for the following reliefs:

“(a) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the petitioners’ case and after examining the legality and validity thereof, allow the petitioners to rectify the GSTR-I for the period 2017-2018;

(b) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to declare that respondent No.4 is eligible to avail ITC to the extent of Rs.64,36,188/- denied to them due to clerical error by petitioner.”

3. The case of the petitioner