GST amount to be adjusted if there is an issue of mismatch in GST Return with Bank Statement

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Vriddhi Infratech India Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner, Commercial Tax and Ors. [Writ Tax No. - 4 of 2022 dated February 23, 2023] has set aside the order passed by the Revenue Department, on the grounds, that the Revenue Department and the Appellate Authority have committed the misreading of FORM GSTR-09 filed by the assessee. Directed the Revenue Department to adjust the GST amount deposited by the Petitioner. 

Facts

Vriddhi Infratech India Pvt. Ltd. ("the Petitioner") was issued a Notice ("the Notice") dated June 23, 2020 as per Section 61 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("the CGST Act") claiming that the Petitioner's annual return, filed in the FORM GSTR-09 dated January 30, 2020, showed a turnover of INR 129.52 lakhs, which did not match its bank statement. 

The Petitioner has challenged the Order-in-Original dated June 4, 2021 ("the OIO") passed, as per Section 61 of the CGST Act and Section 74 of the CGST Act and the Order-in-Appeal ("the OIA") dated October 26, 2021 on the grounds, that the GST amount which could not be deposited in the Financial Year ("F.Y") 2017-18, but in June, 2018, to be adjusted in the F.Y 2018-19.

The Petitioner contended that, the very basis of the Notice is wrong, as its FORM GSTR-09 shows the turnover amount of INR 129.52 lakhs with regard to supply made to unregistered persons under the B2C Category and the Revenue Department ("the Respondent") did not consider the entire form, which at its end shows the total turnover of INR 20,37,13,502.00 lakhs through FORM GSTR-09 in the F.Y 2017-18.

Issue

Whether the Respondent has misread the FORM-GSTR-09 filed by the Petitioner?

Held

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Writ Tax No. – 4 held as under:

• Observed that, the Respondent and the Appellate Authority have committed the misreading of FORM GSTR-09.
• Directed the Respondent to adjust the GST amount deposited by the Petitioner in the F.Y 2018-19.
• Directed the Respondent to release the security amount deposited under the interim order.
• Set aside the OIO and the OIA.