GST WEEKLY UPDATE : 50/2023-24 (10.03.2024) By CA Vipul Khandhar

-By CA Vipul Khandhar

1. Guideline for the GST registration speed up & online tracking of the same on portal:

In accordance with Rule 9 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, pertaining to the verification and approval of registration applications, following is informed:

Where a person has undergone Aadhaar authentication as per sub-rule (4A) of rule 8 but has been identified in terms of Rule 9(aa) by the common portal for detailed verification based on risk profile, your application for registration would be processed within thirty days of application submission.

Necessary changes would also be made to reflect the same in the online tracking module vis-à-vis processing of registration application.

2. Integration of E-Waybill system with New IRP Portals:

1. GSTN is pleased to announce the successful integration of E-Waybill services with four new IRP portals via NIC, enabling taxpayers to generate E-Waybills alongside E-Invoicing on these four IRPs.
2.   This new facility complements the existing services available on the NIC-IRP portal, making E-Waybill services, along with E-Invoicing, available across all six IRPs.
3.   Please find below the websites for all six IRP portals:

     https://einvoice1.gst.gov.in     https://einvoice4.gst.gov.in

     https://einvoice2.gst.gov.in     https://einvoice5.gst.gov.in

     https://einvoice3.gst.gov.in     https://einvoice6.gst.gov.in

3. Delhi State GST Dept. issued guideline for the rectification of assessment orders to correct the errors apparent on the face of record u/s 161 of the DGST Act:

The Delhi GST Department has issued Instruction vide F.No.3(543)/GST/Policy/2024/1312-18 dated March 01, 2024 regarding the rectification of assessment orders to correct the errors apparent on the face of record under section 161 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the DGST Act”).

Several representations have been received with regard to allowing rectification of demand orders issued by zonal/ field formations on account of difficulties faced by tax payers/ dealers. It is submitted that allowing for rectification reduce the unnecessary litigation. Further, it has been brought to the notice of this Department, that several demand orders passed by Proper Officer pertaining to the FY 2017-18 have apparent errors including clerical/ arithmetical mistakes which can be simply resolved by invoking the provisions of rectifications as available under the DGST Act, 2017.

In this regard, the field formations are advised to strictly follow the letter of the law. The provisions of the Act have been reproduced as below: 

Section 161. Rectification of errors apparent on the face of record:-

Without prejudice to the provisions of Section 160, and notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, any authority, who has passed or issued any decision or order or notice or certificate or any other document, may rectify any error which is apparent on the face of record in such decision or order or notice or certificate or any other document, either on its own motion or where such error is brought to its notice by any officer appointed under this Act or an officer appointed under this Act or an officer appointed under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act or by the affected person within a period of three months from the date of issue of such decision or order or notice or certificate or any other document, as the case may be:

Provided that no such rectification shall be done after a period of six months from the date of issue of such decision or order or notice or certificate or any other document.

Provided further that the said period of six months shall not apply in such cases where the rectification is purely in the nature of correction of a clerical or arithmetical error, arising from any accidental slip or omission:

Provided also that where such rectification adversely affects any person, the principles of natural justice shall be followed by the authority carrying out such rectification.

Further, sub-rule (7) of Rule 142 of DGST Rules, 2017 states that

…(7) Where a rectification of the order has been passed in accordance with the provisions of section 161 or where an order uploaded on the system has been withdrawn, a summary of the rectification order or of the withdrawal order shall be uploaded electronically by the proper officer in FORM GST DRC-08.

Following points merits attention of ward officers while invoking the provisions of rectification

1. It should be ensured that the reasons for initiating suo-moto rectifications are recorded in writing before such proceedings are initiated.
2. Where such powers are invoked on the application filed by the registered person, the application should be made within three months of the date of the order. Further, the rectification order in FORM GST DRC-08 should be passed within the period of six months of the date of original order.

III. The power of rectification in the order is confined only to mistakes apparent on the face of record. The application for rectification can be made if the mistake is ex facie and the matter does not involve presentation of further arguments or replies or submissions by either counter parties. In simple terms, a decision on the debatable point of law or undisputed questions of fact is not a mistake apparent from the record.

1. Even in certain scenarios the Authority may not have considered the arguments as submitted by the appellant then such missed submissions may also not be considered as mistake apparent on record as in case of supporting documents not considered etc. Therefore, if there are interpretation points on facts of the case or from the law perspective, then it cannot be processed through rectification procedure.
2. The rectification may not be done where an appeal is preferred by the registered person to higher appellate forums.

Following type cases have been brought to the notice of this department and may be considered for limited purposes rectification under section 161:

1. Where amount of demand in question has already fully deposited/ reversed vide DRC-03 and adequately informed to the proper officer in the reply filed by the registered person/ dealer but the same has not been taken into consideration at the time of issuance of demand order.

1. Where there is arithmetical error i.e. calculation error/ head error i.e. IGST, CGST and DGST in the demand order issued by the proper officer.

The field formations are hereby advised to carefully examine the provisions of DGST Act, 2017 and apply their mind while invoking powers of the rectification for all the above cases.

4. AAR & Important Judgements:

(i) Hon’ble Allahabad High court Decision Regarding Appeal cannot be condone beyond statutory period allowed in the gst law by the court under limitation Act:

(Applicant – M/s. Yadav Steels)

In the case of M/s. Yadav Steels v. Additional Commissioner and Anr. [Writ Tax No. 975 of 2023 dated February 15, 2024] dismissed the writ petition, thereby holding that, Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (“the Limitation Act”) would not be applicable for appeal filed under Section 107 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the UPGST Act”).

M/s. Yadav Steels (“the Petitioner”) has filed a writ petition against the order dated January 23, 2023, (“the Impugned Order”) passed under Section 107 of the UPGST Act wherein the appeal filed by the Petitioner was dismissed on the ground of limitation as the said appeal was filed approximately 66 days beyond the date of limitation.

Issue:

Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act would be applicable for appeal filed under Section 107 of the UPGST Act?

Held:

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Writ Tax No. 975 of 2023 held as under:

• Observed that, Section 107(4) of the UPGST Act, allows extension for a period of one month. Also, Section 107 aims to prevent undue delay in the adjudication process and promote effective administration of the GST regime.
• Relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of M/s. Abhishek Trading Corporation v. Commissioner (Appeals) and Anr. [Writ Tax No. 1394 of 2023 dated January 19, 2024]and noted that, the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) is a special statute and a self-contained code in itself and Section 5 of the Limitation Act would not be applicable.
• Opined that, the judgement Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of  Chakraborty and Sons. v. Union of India and Others. [MAT 81 of 2022 dated December 01, 2023] wherein it was held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, would be applicable as Section 107 of the CGST Act does not expressly or impliedly exclude the attraction of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, would not be applicable in the present case.
• Held that, the writ petition is devoid of merits. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.

Relevant Provision:

Section 5 of the Limitation Act:

“5. Extension of prescribed period in certain cases.—

Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period.

Explanation.—The fact that the appellant or the applicant was missed by any order, practice or judgment of the High Court in ascertaining or computing the prescribed period may be sufficient cause within the meaning of this section.”

Disclaimer:

This publication contains information for general guidance only. It is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although the best of endeavour has been made to provide the provisions in a simpler and accurate form, there is no substitute to detailed research with regard to the specific situation of a particular individual or entity. We do not accept any responsibility for loss incurred by any person for acting or refraining to act as a result of any matter in this publication.

(The author is a well known Chartered Accountant practicing at Ahmedabad)