Facts of the Case

M/s Rajendra Agency approached the Rajasthan High Court with a grievance that, due to inadvertence, it had filed some incorrect entries in its GSTR-1 returns for the financial years 2019-20 and 2020-21. When the firm approached the GST Department for rectification, no action was taken on its request. Its counsel relied on a similar order of the Calcutta High Court, which had earlier directed a GST department to consider a comparable rectification representation, and sought a similar direction here.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the GST Department could be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representation seeking rectification of inadvertent errors in its GSTR-1 returns.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The incorrect entries in GSTR-1 for two financial years were the result of inadvertence, and the petitioner had already filed a representation (dated 01.10.2022) seeking correction, which remained undecided.
  • A similar relief had been granted by the Calcutta High Court in a comparable case, directing consideration of a rectification representation.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Respondent No. 3 opposed the relief sought by the petitioner-firm, though the specific grounds of opposition are not elaborated in the order.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that since the petitioner had filed a representation seeking rectification in GSTR-1, Respondent No. 3 may consider the same.
  • Respondent No. 3 was directed to consider and decide the representation (Annexure-1) dated 01.10.2022, strictly in accordance with law, within six weeks.
  • The petitioner was to be given an opportunity of hearing before any order is passed on the representation.

Important Clarification

The Court did not decide whether the petitioner's GSTR-1 entries were in fact erroneous or whether they should be corrected — it only directed that the pending rectification request be examined on its merits, with a hearing, within a fixed period. This reflects a now-fairly common judicial approach to GSTR-1 correction disputes: rather than deciding the correction question itself, courts direct the department to consider it properly.

Sections Involved

  • Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — provisions relating to filing and rectification of GST returns (GSTR-1)
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India — writ jurisdiction

Decision – In Favour of

Decided in favour of the petitioner to the extent of securing consideration of its claim — the GST authority was directed to decide the rectification representation, after hearing the petitioner, within six weeks.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur
  • Case No.: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4352 of 2023
  • Coram: Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice Praveer Bhatnagar
  • Date of Order: 26 April 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.