Jharkhand High Court
M/S Mahalaxmi Infra Contract Ltd. ... vs Goods And Services Tax Council ... on 22 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.M.P. No. 832 of 2022
M/s Mahalaxmi Infra Contract Ltd. having its registered
office at Ahmedabad and place of business at Lalmatia,
Godda, Jharkhand through its authorized Signatory namely
Valani Ketan Kumar Shambhulal R/o Bhuj, Kachchh, Gujarat
--- --- Petitioner
Versus
1.Goods and Services Tax Council through the Secretary,
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, New Delhi
2.The State of Jharkhand through the Commissioner of State
Goods and Services Tax, Dhurwa, Ranchi
3.The Deputy Commissioner, State Taxes, West Circle, Ranchi
4.The Deputy Commissioner, State Taxes, Chirkunda Circle, Dhanbad
5.Eastern Coalfields Limited, Mahagama, Godda
6.MIPL-NKAS(JV) having its address at Dahernangi Patch, Rajmahal Area,
ECL, Lalmatia, Godda through its Director
7.Joint Commissioner(Administration), Ranchi
8.Goods and Services Tax Network represented by its Chairman, New Delhi
--- --- Opposite Parties
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioner : M/s Nitin Pasari , Sidhi Jalan, Advocates
For the O.P. No.1 & 8 : Mr. Amit Kumar, Sr. S.C.
For the O.P. No.5 : M/s Rajesh Lala, Kumar Nishant, Advocate
For the O.P.No.6 : Mr. Pratap Singh, Advocate
For the O.P.-State : Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr. S.C.-I
03/22.11.2022 This civil miscellaneous petition of the writ petitioner in W.P.(T)
No. 2478 of 2021 seeks modification of the judgment dated 18.10.2022
in respect of the following directions/observations:
a) The GSTN should allow the petitioner to make necessary
corrections in GSTR-1 Form for January, 2019 and if there
being any technical difficulty, such correction should be allowed
manually.
b) The Respondent no. 5 (Eastern Coalfields Limited, Godda) can
claim interest over the Input Tax Credit, which it had to reverse
owing to error in filing of GSTR-1 in March, 2019.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has
allowed the writ petition and directed the GSTN to permit the petitioner
to make correction in its GSTR-1 form for January 2019 online within a
specified period or in case there are technical difficulties, manually.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the request for opening of
the GSTN portal should be routed through the jurisdictional State Tax
Officer of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also
submitted that the observation in the last paragraph of the judgment
granting liberty to the respondent no. 5 to claim interest over the I.T.C.,
which it had to reverse owing to error in filing of GSTR-1 in March
2019 may also be modified.
3. Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned Senior Standing Counsel No.1
appearing for the opposite party State Tax Officer has, upon instructions,
submitted that the petitioner may not be required to route his request for
opening of the GSTN portal through the State Tax Officer as there is a
specific direction upon the GSTN to open the portal.
4. However, upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and in
order to facilitate things, since the petitioner is assessed under the
concerned jurisdictional State Tax Officer and for that reason only due
diligence were conducted in the midst of the writ proceedings through
the Joint Commissioner (Administration), Ranchi, whose report dated
27.08.2022 has also been incorporated in the judgment, we are of the
view that request for opening of the GSTN portal in terms of the
directions passed in the writ petition can be made through the concerned
jurisdictional State Tax Officer i.e., respondent no.3 / opposite party no.3
herein. This would facilitate things and avoid delay.
5. However, we are not satisfied that any modification is required so
far as observation made in the last paragraph No. 14 of the judgment
passed in the writ petition is concerned. The liberty was granted upon
hearing learned counsel for the parties on the request of respondent no.5,
who claimed that since I.T.C earlier availed had to be reversed, he had to
pay interest thereupon. We however make it clear that we have not made
any comments on such a claim made by the Respondent no.5.
6. With the aforesaid only modification, the instant CMP is disposed
of. The instant order be read along with the judgment passed in W.P.(T)
No. 2478 of 2021 dated 18.10.2022.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
A.Mohanty
