GST Payment through DRC-03 by cash against notice issued ASMT-10 for Excess claimed ITC in 3B

719 views

Save Share

Deepak Jaiswal

Student CA Final

21 Points Posted on 23 June 2026

My client’s accountant made a payment dated 03‑05‑2026 through Form DRC‑03 against notice ASMT‑10 for excess ITC claimed in GSTR‑3B for April 2022 (F.Y. 2022‑23). However, upon reconciliation of GSTR‑2A, it was found that the suppliers’ invoices for April 2022 had been uploaded before the due date of 11th May 2022. The GST input was not reflected in GSTR‑2B for the relevant month due to technical glitches on the GST portal, resulting in mismatches. Since the invoices are duly appearing in GSTR‑2A, the question arises whether the payment made through DRC‑03 can be claimed/refunded.

Replies (3)

Quick Summary

If cash was paid through DRC-03 due to an ASMT-10 notice but the ITC was actually eligible and reflected in GSTR-2A, do not reclaim it in GSTR-3B. File ASMT-11 with supporting evidence and apply for a refund through RFD-01. Include reconciliation, timelines and relevant CBIC guidance.

Aashok Kumar Sharma

Finance/Compliance Consultant

77971 Points Posted on 23 June 2026

Do not try to re-claim the credit in the next GSTR-3B, as this will trigger another system mismatch flag. Submit Form ASMT-11 to contest the notice on merits using GSTR-2A data, and file Form RFD-01 to get back the cash mistakenly paid via DRC-03.

Amjad Khan

22 Points Posted on 03 July 2026

Adding to Aashok's point on the ASMT-11/RFD-01 route - when you draft the ASMT-11 reply itself, walk through the timeline explicitly: invoice uploaded by supplier before 11 May 2022, GSTR-2A reflecting it correctly, and GSTR-2B missing it due to the portal glitch (a known, documented issue for that period, so cite it plainly rather than just asserting it). Attach the GSTR-2A extract and a reconciliation statement showing the ITC was genuinely available in that period, just not reflected in 2B due to a system error, not because it wasn't eligible.

Reference Section 16(2) and the relevant CBIC circulars/advisories on GSTR-2A vs 2B mismatches from technical glitches - officers do accept these when documented properly, since it's a recurring, acknowledged problem. Don't leave the ASMT-11 as a bare denial; the more it reads like a point-by-point rebuttal with dates and citations, the less likely it escalates to a DRC-01.

Rushabh

Automation Expert

10733 Points Posted on 13 November 2026

Refund is not automatic. If the invoices were uploaded by suppliers within the statutory time and the ITC otherwise satisfies the applicable conditions, the April 2022 claim may be defensible; the mere absence of the credit in GSTR‑2B does not, by itself, establish ineligibility. But GSTR‑2A visibility alone does not prove that all ITC conditions are met or that a portal glitch caused the 2B mismatch. Verify supplier filing and invoice details, receipt of supplies, tax payment and the return/reconciliation records.

The DRC‑03 payment was made against an ASMT‑10 discrepancy, which is a scrutiny notice rather than a demand order. A refund may be sought as excess payment under section 54, subject to the applicable procedure and limitation; the facts provided do not establish whether that period remains open. Preserve the DRC‑03 ARN and challan, notice and response, GSTR‑2A/2B and supplier-return evidence, and a clear reconciliation. Also check whether any formal demand order or adjustment followed, as that may affect the route.

This reconciliation and refund workflow is easier to manage when invoice-level evidence, notices and payment records are kept together. Manual practice work can make these checks repetitive and difficult; automation reduces that repetition while leaving eligibility and legal judgment in professional hands. Our platform offers 2,000+ AI agents and 650+ integrations across relevant GST and accounting workflows. For a WhatsApp walkthrough tailored to this process, message us at https://wa.me/message/3HVOZ7HIY4ESC1.