Patna High Court
Om Traders vs Union Of India on 13 May, 2025
Author: P. B. Bajanthri
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16509 of 2024
======================================================
Om Traders a partnership firm having its office at H. No.- 956A, Om Traders,
Ramchandrapur, Biharsharif, Nalanda- 803216 Bihar through its Authorized
Signatory Pankaj Kishore (Male, aged about 48 Years) Son of Shri Indra Deo
Prasad, resident of near Kali Asthan Tilhapar, Bhaisasur, Biharsharif, District-
Nalanda, Bihar- 803101.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Finance, North Block, New Delhi-
110001.
2. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, Ministry of Finance,
Government of India through its secretary having its office at North Block,
New Delhi- 110001.
3. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, Grievance Ministry of
Finance, Government of India through its secretary having its office at North
Block, New Delhi- 110013.
4. Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, having its office at Bir Chand
Patel Path Patna- 800001.
5. State of Bihar, through the Commissioner of State Tax, Bihar, Patna having
its office at Vikas Bhawan, Patna- 800001.
6. Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Biharsharif, Patna East, Bihar.
7. Goods and Services Tax, Network Having its office at word mark 1,
Aerocity, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi 110037.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. D.V.Pathy, Advocate
Mr. Sadashiv Tiwari, Advocate
Mr. Hiresh Karan, Advocate
Mrs. Shivani Dewalla, Advocate
Mrs. Prachi Pallavi, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anshuman Singh, SR. SC, CGST
Mr. Vikas Kumar, SC-11
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)
Date : 13-05-2025
In the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the
following relief(s):-
Patna High Court CWJC No.16509 of 2024 dt.13-05-2025
2/9
i) the order dated 06.05.2020 (as contained
in Annexure - P 6) passed by the respondent no. 2 for
the Tax period 2019-20 only on the ground that the
grievance was already addressed by the proper
authority under the State Act and that there is no
provision of adjustment of erroneous payment of tax
under one head i.e. IGST with the liability of other
head i.e. CGST and SGST and advising payment of
erroneously payment of tax again and claim refund
without reference to the respondent no. 1 to whom the
application was addressed being contrary to the settled
principles of natural justice and also Article 265 of the
Constitution of India be set aside and quashed.
ii) the order dated 23.08.2024 and also the
summary of order in Form GST DRC - 07 (as
contained in Annexure - P 9 series) passed by the
respondent no. 6 raising demand of tax, interest and
penalty amounting to Rs. 2,49,45,852/- for the month
of April 2019 occurring only on account of an
inadvertent clerical error in clicking the "submit"
button while uploading the said return and the
subsequent correction in GSTR 3B for the month of
May 2019 without taking notice of the statement/return
of outward supply in Form GSTR 1 for the month of
April 2019; the auto populated statement of purchase
in Form GSTR 2A reflecting purchase of goods and
availability of ITC by way of IGST and also the
provisions of Rule 88A of the CGST Rules (hereinafter
called the Rules) permitting order of adjustment of
IGST with CGST and SGST and the manner
elaborated in Circular No. 98/17/2019/GST dated
23.04.2019
issued by the Central Board of Indirect
Taxes in absence of a tax liability under IGST being
contrary to Article 265 of the Constitution of India and
is arbitrary be set aside and quashed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16509 of 2024 dt.13-05-2025
iii) the charge of interest on disputed tax
arising only on account of an inadvertent clerical error
in filling up the return in Form GSTR 3B particularly,
in view of availability of ITC in the electronic credit
ledger by way of IGST adjustable with the tax liability
under the CGST and SGST under Rule 88 A of the
Rule being illegal and arbitrary be set aside and
quashed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner is a two
wheeler dealer having a business in the State of Bihar. He was
purchasing two wheelers from the manufacturer and the
manufacturer are outside the State of Bihar. Therefore, there would
be a IGST transaction. For the month of April 2019, GSTR 1 was
filed on 10.05.2019 and GSTR 3B was filed on 20.06.2019. In
filing GSTR 1, there is no error committed by the petitioner. While
filing GSTR 3B, the petitioner inadvertently committed error
under the column of total taxable value is indicated Rs.
8,23,83,871.09/-. in GSTR 1 total taxable value has been shown as
8,46,81,924.41/-. Similarly, IGST has been shown as Rs.
2,24,72,258.31/- whereas Rs. 34,347.02/- has been shown under
GSTR 1. To the above effect, petitioner noticed that he had
committed error while submitting GSTR 3B and it is not tallying
with the GSTR 1 insofar as total taxable value and total integrated
tax. Similarly, total CGST and total SGST. In this regard,
Patna High Court CWJC No.16509 of 2024 dt.13-05-2025
petitioner had submitted application to rectify GSTR 3B on par
with the figure mentioned in GSTR 1 on 17.05.2019, the same was
rejected on 06.05.2020. Resultantly, show cause notice was issued
for assessment GST DRC-01 on 31.05.2024. Petitioner had
submitted return submission on 16.06.2024. In this backdrop,
impugned order has been passed by the concerned authority on
23.08.2024 while demanding certain amount of tax under the
heading of SGST and CGST for the month of April 2019. On
06.05.2020, Assistant Commissioner of CGST and CX Ranchi
Zone, Patna, office of the Chief Commissioner of GST and Central
Excise (Ranchi Zone) passed the following remarks:-
Details for registration number : CBOEC/E/2020/01342
Name of complainant INDRA DEO PRASAD
Date of Receipt 17/03/2020
Received By Ministry/Department Central Board of Excise and Customs
Grievance Description
To,
Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs,
Department of Revenue,
Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India.
Sub: Request for adjustment of excess payment of IGST towards CGST and SGST.
Dear Sir/Madam,
We are carrying on business under trade name "Om Traders" at Bihar Sharif in Bihar and
registered under Bihar Sharif Circle bearing GST No. 10AAAFO7986P1ZP.
Due to mistake in filing of GSTR-3B for the month of April 2019, excess amount of GST tax has
been paid in IGST instead of CGST and SGST. I had intimated this error to the concerned
authority and requested for adjustment of excess paid GST tax in wrong head to the correct heads.
But after several reminders since May 2019, my issue has not been resolved yet.
I would like to draw your kind attention in a similar case, the Hon'ble High Court of Kerela in its
Patna High Court CWJC No.16509 of 2024 dt.13-05-2025
judgment dated 12/11/2018 under WP(C) No. 35868 of 2018 has mandated the tax authority to
transfer the tax in correct head when GST is paid in wrong head inadvertently by the petitioner.
So, I request the department to kindly transfer excess payment of GST in wrong head to correct
heads. Attached letter contains full details with supporting documents for your kind reference.
Thanks & Regards,
Indra Deo Prasad
Partner
M/s Om Traders,
Ramchandrapur,
Bihar Sharif,
Nalanda,
Bihar 803101
Current Status Case closed
Date of Action 06.05.2020
Remarks
The matter raised in the instant Grievance under Grievance under CPGRAMS Reg. No.
CBOEC/E/2020/01342 dated 17.03.2020 was examined by the jurisdictional Authority (CGST and
CX, Patna East Division) who informed after examination that GSTIN - 10AAAFO7986P1ZP of
M/s Om Traders, Ramchandrapur, Bihar Sharif was verified from the taxpayers list on GST
Application Portal and it was found that the said taxpayer was supervised by the State Authority
i.e. Bihar Sharif Circle and thus their grievance was already addressed to the proper authority.
Further he added that as per existing law of GST, there was no provision of adjustment of
erroneous payment of tax amount under one head i.e. IGST to liability of other Head i.e.
CGST/SGST. As there exists liability of CGST amounting to Rs. 1,12,18,955.27 and SGST
amounting to Rs. 1,12,18,955.27 against the said taxpayer, they are required to pay liability first
and then apply for the refund of erroneous payment made under IGST through IGST through ITC
amounting to Rs. 2,24,37,911.54 to the concerned State Authority/proper authority. So far as the
judgment of Hon'ble Kerela High Court dated 12.11.2018 in WP © No. 3586 of 2018 quoted by
the taxpayer is concerned, it is not squarely applicable in the case as it relates to a particular case
for specific reason.
Under the above circumstances, the grievance CPGRAMS Reg. No. CBOEC/E/2020/01342 dated
17.03.2020 is disposed off from this office.
Officer concerns to
Officer Name Sujit Kumar Sadhu (Assistant Commissioner of CGST and CX
Ranchi Zone Patna
Organisation Name Chief Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (Ranchi Zone)
Contact Address Central Revenue Building Annexe, Birchand Patel Path, Patna,
Email Address [email protected]
Contact Number 06122504035
The same was not complied by the petitioner, in this
backdrop, the petitioner filed present CWJC contending that it is
Patna High Court CWJC No.16509 of 2024 dt.13-05-2025
only a rectification of GSTR 3B on par with the GSTR 1 filed on
20.06.2019 and 10.05.2019 respectively.
3. In support of the aforementioned contention, learned
counsel for the petitioner relied on decision of the Bombay High
Court dated 29.07.2024 passed in writ petition no. 7912 of 2024 in
the case of Aberdare Technologies Pvt Ltd & Anr vs. Central
Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs and ors. Central Board of
Direct Taxes and customs preferred Special Leave Petition (civil)
diary no. 6332 of 2025 and it was dismissed on 23.01.2025, while
upholding the judgment dated 29.07.2024 passed in writ petition
no. 7912 of 2024 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Civil
Appellate Jurisdiction. The petitioner is entitled to same relief.
4. Per contra learned counsel for the respondent resisted
the aforementioned contentions and submitted that petitioner has
failed to take the advise of the Assistant Commissioner of CGST
and CX Ranchi Zone, dated 06.05.2020 which is narrated supra.
Insofar as making payment of CGST and SGST and to claim IGST
before the concerned authority. Further, he relied on Section 49(5)
of the CGST Act and apprise this Court to dismiss the present writ
petition.
5. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
Disputed issue in the present lis is whether petitioner is permitted to
rectify GSTR 3B on par with the GSTR 1 filed on 20.06.2019 and
Patna High Court CWJC No.16509 of 2024 dt.13-05-2025
10.05.2019 or not? In the government, there is no system of
rectification of any return once it is filed. However, petitioner had
submitted application to rectify GST 3B on par with the GSTR 1
relating to certain total taxable value, total integrated tax, total
CGST, total SGST. He had committed error insofar as mentioning
total taxable value while submitting GSTR 3B and it is not in
accordance with the GSTR 1. In the absence of any system to
modify or to carry out necessary correction in GSTR 3B the
concerned authority has proceeded to advise the petitioner to pay
CGST and GST thereafter claim refund and it is not supported by
any statutory provision. Further, we have noticed and repeatedly
ask the State counsel as to whether rectification of GSTR 3B on par
with the GSTR 1 has any repercussion insofar as loss to the State
exchequer or not? On this point, he could not apprise this Court.
6. Be that as it may in identical situation, Bombay High
Court had an occasion to decide the matter insofar as rectification
of GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B in the case of Aberdare Technologies
Pvt Ltd & Anr vs. Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs
and ors cited supra and it has been confirmed by the Supreme
Court.
7. Bombay High Court relied on Engineers (I) Pvt Ltd.
Vs. Union of India & ors. (para 7 to 23) it has taken note of para
12 to 18 and directed as under para 4 reads as under:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.16509 of 2024 dt.13-05-2025
"In the circumstances, we direct
respondents to open the portal within one week from
the date of this order being uploaded and inform
petitioner to enable them to amend/rectify Form
GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B within one week. If the portal
is not opened for whatever reasons, petitioner shall
file application to amend/rectify Form GSTR-1 and
GSTR-3B manually and respondent nos. 2 and 3 are
directed to accept and process the same in accordance
with law. If these respondents are going to take a
stand contrary to petitioner's interest, they shall give
notice to petitioner atleast five working days in
advance and give personal hearing."
8. The same was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. In the present case also it is error committed by the
petitioner insofar as filling up of certain figures in the GSTR 3B
return and it is not tallying with the GSTR 1 to that extent
petitioner's request is for rectification of the same. Thus, petitioner
has made out a case so as to interfere with the impugned order
dated 06.05.2020 and it is set aside. The concerned authorities are
hereby directed to rectify form GSTR 3B on par with contents of
GSTR-1 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of
this order. In this regard, petitioner is hereby directed to submit a
manual application. The concerned authority is hereby directed to
Patna High Court CWJC No.16509 of 2024 dt.13-05-2025
redress the consequent grievance if any, of the petitioner within a
period of two months from today.
9. With the above observation the present writ petition
stands allowed.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
( S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
Ankit Kumar/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 16.05.2025.
Transmission Date NA
