Facts of the Case:

In this case, the respondent-taxpayer’s request to rectify the details furnished in GSTR-1 for the tax periods of August 2017, November 2017, December 2017 and January 2018, so as to enable the correct flow of Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to ₹23,39,613 to its customers. The jurisdictional authority rejected the rectification application on the ground that it was filed belatedly and that the GST law did not contain any provision permitting such rectification after the prescribed time.

Aggrieved by the rejection, the taxpayer filed a writ petition. The learned Single Judge, relying on the earlier decisions in Sun Dye Chem v. Assistant Commissioner and Pentacle Plant Machineries Pvt. Ltd. v. Office of the GST Council, directed the department to permit the taxpayer to upload the corrected GSTR-1 within four weeks. Challenging this direction, the Department preferred the present intra-court appeal contending that such rectification was not permissible under the statutory framework.

Issue:

Whether a registered person can be permitted to rectify clerical or arithmetical mistakes in GSTR-1 beyond the statutory time limit to enable the rightful flow of Input Tax Credit to recipients, notwithstanding the absence of an express statutory provision permitting such rectification.

Held That:

The Division Bench dismissed the Department’s intra-court appeal and affirmed the order of the learned Single Judge permitting rectification of GSTR-1. The Court held that the issue was no longer res integra, having already been settled by a coordinate Bench in The Principal Chief Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Chennai v. Deepa Traders, which had relied upon the decisions in Sun Dye Chem and Pentacle Plant Machineries Pvt. Ltd.

The Court also placed reliance on the observations of the Supreme Court while dismissing the Special Leave Petition against the Bombay High Court’s decision in Aberdare Technologies Pvt. Ltd., wherein it was recognised that the right to correct clerical or arithmetical mistakes is an incident of the fundamental right to carry on business and cannot be denied merely because of software limitations. The Court observed that technological constraints cannot override substantive legal rights, particularly where rectification is intended to facilitate the legitimate flow of Input Tax Credit without causing prejudice to the revenue. Accordingly, the Department was directed to enable the respondent to upload the rectified GSTR-1 within four weeks and, upon such uploading, to process the consequential ITC claims of the recipients in accordance with law.

Case Name: The Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Coimbatore Versus M/s. Akshaya Building Solution, rep. by its Partner, Mr. K. Senthilkumar dated 18.06.2026

To read the complete judgement 2026 Taxo.online 1732