The Kerala High Court has set aside a Goods and Services Tax (GST) assessment order issued against assessee, citing duplication and conflicting conclusions between two orders passed by the same department on the same issue.
The bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. observed that the second order was passed despite an earlier order which had already dropped the proceedings after accepting the taxpayer’s explanation.
The petitioner/assessee is a private limited company having registration under the provisions of the Central Goods and Service Tax, Act, 2017/Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The grievance of the petitioner is against Ext.P14 order, by which the rectification sought by the petitioner, in respect of order, was rejected on the reason that that petitioner failed to submit the rectification application within the statutory period of six months as contemplated under Section 161 of the GST Act.
The petitioner company had sought rectification of the later order, flagging the issue of duplication through an email dated February 1, 2024. However, the GST officer rejected the request on the grounds that the rectification request was not uploaded via the GST portal within the six-month statutory time frame under Section 161 of the CGST Act.
The High Court, however, held that Section 161 does not limit rectification solely to online applications. The judge noted that the department had acknowledged the receipt of the petitioner’s email within the prescribed period and, therefore, could not refuse to act on an “apparent error on the face of the record.”
“Two mutually conflicting orders passed on the same issue by officers of the same department cannot stand. The second order could not have been passed,” the court ruled, quashing both the second order and the rejection of rectification.
The Court clarified that once the petitioner had brought the duplication to the department’s attention in time, the officer was bound to correct the mistake, even suo motu.
Case Details
Case Title: M/S. Winter Wood Designers & Contractors India Pvt.Ltd Versus The State Tax Officer
Case No.: WP(C) NO. 9086 OF 2025
Date: 09/06/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: K.S.Hariharan Nair
Counsel For Respondent: Arun Ajay Sankar
