Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTGST Annual Return Simplified: New Column Added in GSTR-9 to Resolve Tax...

GST Annual Return Simplified: New Column Added in GSTR-9 to Resolve Tax Reconciliation Issues

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

In a significant move aimed at improving the accuracy and transparency of annual return filings, the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) has introduced a key change in Table 9 of GSTR-9 — the annual return form filed by registered taxpayers.

What Has Changed?

Earlier, taxpayers faced frequent reconciliation issues when the actual tax liability exceeded the amount reported and paid through GSTR-1 (Outward Supplies) and GSTR-3B (Monthly Return). In such cases, the differential tax was paid through Form DRC-03.

However, these additional DRC-03 payments were not automatically reflected in GSTR-9, often leading to mismatches between the tax payable and tax paid figures, causing confusion during audits and scrutiny.

The New Addition: Column 9 in Table 9

To address this long-standing concern, a new column (Column 9) has been introduced in Table 9 of the GSTR-9 form. This new field will capture the difference between tax payable and tax paid — including any payments made through DRC-03 — providing a comprehensive view of total tax discharge during the financial year.

GSTR-9

Form GSTR-9 is an annual return to be filed once for each financial year, by the registered taxpayers who were regular taxpayers, including SEZ units and SEZ developers. The taxpayers are required to furnish details of purchases, sales, input tax credit or refund claimed or demand created etc.

Read More: Assembled Vehicles: CESTAT Quashes Rs. 155 Crore Customs Duty Demand Against Coal India, GMMCO

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Personal Hearing Can’t Precede Deadline for GST Notice Reply: Uttarakhand High Court Quashes S. 73 Order

The Uttarakhand High Court has set aside a GST assessment order after finding that...

GST Rectification Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because 3 Month Timeline Expired; Authority Doesn’t Become Functus Officio: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court has ruled that a GST rectification application filed within the...

Electricity Charges Arise Only After Supply and Billing; Supreme Court Rejects Rs. 57.74 Lakh Demand for Unreleased Additional Load

The Supreme Court has rejected an electricity distribution company’s attempt to recover ₹57.74 lakh...

Refund of Interest Paid on GST Liability Discharged Through ITC: GSTAT Restrains State Benches From Deciding Appeals

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, has restrained...

More like this

Personal Hearing Can’t Precede Deadline for GST Notice Reply: Uttarakhand High Court Quashes S. 73 Order

The Uttarakhand High Court has set aside a GST assessment order after finding that...

GST Rectification Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because 3 Month Timeline Expired; Authority Doesn’t Become Functus Officio: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court has ruled that a GST rectification application filed within the...

Electricity Charges Arise Only After Supply and Billing; Supreme Court Rejects Rs. 57.74 Lakh Demand for Unreleased Additional Load

The Supreme Court has rejected an electricity distribution company’s attempt to recover ₹57.74 lakh...