2026-VIL-212-GSTAT-PYG

SGST Tribunal

GST - Demand on Mismatch between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B - Availment in Subsequent Year of Input Tax Credit Omitted in Previous Financial Year under Section 16(4) read with Section 39(9) of CGST Act, 2017 - Appellant claimed input tax credit in GSTR-3B for April 2019 that exceeded the credit auto-populated in GSTR-2A for that month, and the proper officer raised a demand with interest and penalty under Section 73 - Whether the credit pertaining to inward supplies of the previous financial year was available and could be availed in GSTR-3B for April 2019 - HELD - The Appellant furnished the details of each supply along with tax invoices, e-way bills, bilty and GSTR-2A extracts, the inward supplies were genuine, were received in the previous financial year and that the total credit was correct. A minor error in describing the month of one supply could be reconciled from the documents and does not justify denial of credit. The Appellant held excess unutilised credit in the previous year, which corroborates the claim - Section 39(9) permits rectification of omissions before the due date of the September return of the following financial year, provided the omission was not discovered through scrutiny, audit, inspection or enforcement, and the claim was made before any such activity. Under Section 16(4) the credit was claimed before the due date for the September return. GSTR-2A is a facilitation document that does not impact the ability to avail credit on self-assessment under Section 16, and the condition in Section 16(2)(aa) was inserted with effect from 01.01.2022 and does not apply to the disputed period. A mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A cannot by itself be a ground for reversal of credit when the claim is fully verified. A later notice under Section 61 on the same mismatch was also dropped as the reply was found satisfactory - The Appellant was legally entitled to avail and utilise the credit in GSTR-3B for April 2019, and the demand is struck off – The appeal is allowed - Violation of Principles of Natural Justice in Adjudication and Appeal - Notices Uploaded in Additional Notices and Orders Tab, No Date of Hearing under Section 75(4), Order Passed on Undisclosed Date and Non-Speaking Order under Section 107(12) of CGST Act, 2017 - Notice under Section 73 and its reminder were uploaded in the Additional Notices and Orders tab of the portal, with the columns for date, time and venue of hearing marked NA - Appellant did not reply or appear, and the proper officer passed the order on the date fixed for reply - First Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal on a later date, observing that the Appellant was absent and the order had no infirmity - Whether the Order-in-Original and the Order-in-Appeal are vitiated by violation of principles of natural justice - HELD - The Revenue did not dispute that a primary tab for Notices and Orders existed, and no material supported the contention that taxpayers were aware of the practice of uploading notices in the secondary tab – The service of notices at both stages was not proper, and this amounted to denial of opportunity of hearing. Section 75(4) requires a hearing where any adverse decision is contemplated, and it prescribes two independent requirements, one of a written reply and the other of an oral hearing. Failure to avail one does not lead to denial of the other. The proper officer was therefore obliged to fix a date of hearing, which was not done. Both authorities proceeded ex parte and passed orders on later dates that were neither fixed nor communicated - The authority must either pass the order on the date fixed or fix and communicate another date, failing which the ex parte nature is forced on the taxpayer and natural justice is breached - Both the Order-in-Original and the Order-in-Appeal are set aside, the demand with interest and penalty is struck off.

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page