The Madras High Court in the case of P. SENTHIL KUMAR VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (ST) , TUTICORIN DISTRICT. vide W. P. (MD) No. 18411 of 2024 And W. M. P. (MD) Nos. 15664 and 15665 of 2024 dated 01.08.2024, decided not to strictly apply Section 62(2) against the petitioner, given that the goal of the department is statutory compliance rather than penalizing the delay. 

Facts of the Case:  The petitioner challenged an order dated 30.01.2024 issued under Section 62 of the GST Act, 2017. The order followed a notice dated 28.12.2023, and the petitioner had failed to file the GSTR 3B return for November 2023 on time. 

It was argued that they were unaware of the order and only filed the GSTR 3B return on 30.05.2024. They claimed that under Section 62(2) of the GST Act, since the return was filed belatedly, the order should be deemed withdrawn.

The Respondent argued that that the return was filed after the statutory period specified in Section 62(2), and thus the petitioner’s claim under this provision was not valid.

Held that:- The court decided not to strictly apply Section 62(2) against the petitioner, given that the goal of the department is statutory compliance rather than penalizing the delay. The court allowed the delay in filing the GSTR 3B return to be condoned, provided that the petitioner pays the late fee as per Section 47 of the GST Act. The respondent was directed to assess the returns and take necessary actions if there was a shortfall in tax payment.

To read the complete judgment 2024 Taxo.online 1936