Case Details: Periyasamy Karthikeyan vs. State Tax Officer (2026) 39 Centax 82 (Mad.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Krishnan Ramasamy, J.
- Mrs S. P. Sri Harini, for the Petitioner.
- Shri R. Suresh Kumar, Additional Government Pleader, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner-assessee filed a return in Form GSTR-3B and, due to an inadvertent error, claimed Input Tax Credit (ITC) under CGST and SGST instead of IGST. While filing the annual return in Form GSTR-9, the assessee disclosed that ITC had been wrongly availed under CGST and SGST and that there was a short payment under IGST. The error was further rectified through Form GSTR-9C, supported by a Chartered Accountant certificate certifying the incorrect availment. The jurisdictional officer under CGST initially issued Form GST ASMT-10 under Section 61 of the CGST Act and, after considering the reply submitted, issued Form GST ASMT-12, thereby dropping the proceedings. Subsequently, Forms GST DRC-01A and GST DRC-01 were issued on the same issue, alleging revenue loss, and an assessment order was passed without considering the petitioner’s reply. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the petitioner had made incorrect entries while filing Form GSTR-3B; however, the error was rectified by filing Form GSTR-9C with proper certification. It was observed that once such rectification was carried out, the question of short payment or excess claim would not survive in the absence of any actual loss to the revenue. The Court held that the alleged dues under CGST and SGST arose only from incorrect classification, as the ITC pertained to IGST and the excess amount remained available with the Government, including an advance cash payment not yet availed. It further held that revenue loss would arise only if ITC had been availed without entitlement, which was not the case; therefore, the issuance of Form GST DRC-01A and Form GST DRC-01 on the same issue was unsustainable. Accordingly, the impugned assessment order under Section 61 of the CGST Act was quashed.
