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
HomeNotificationSystem Glitch Triggers GSTR-3A Notices to Composition Taxpayers: No Action Needed Clarifies...

System Glitch Triggers GSTR-3A Notices to Composition Taxpayers: No Action Needed Clarifies GSTN

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

GSTR-3A Notices Sent in Error to Composition Dealers: GSTN Issues Clarification

The Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN) has stated that the system glitch triggers GSTR-3A notices to composition taxpayers but no action is needed for compliant or cancelled registrants.

As per the provisions of Section 39(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, read with Rule 68 of the CGST Rules, 2017, notices in Form GSTR-3A are required to be issued in cases of non-filing of Form GSTR-4. 

However, it has come to notice that, due to a system-related glitch, such notices have been inadvertently issued in certain cases where they were not applicable — including instances involving taxpayers whose registrations had been cancelled prior to the Financial Year 2024–25.

The issue is currently under active examination, and the technical team is implementing appropriate corrective measures to ensure that such instances do not recur. In the meantime, taxpayers who have either duly filed the relevant return or whose registrations were cancelled prior to the Financial Year 2024–25 are advised to ignore these notices, as no further action is required on their part in such cases.

“ For any other issues or concerns, taxpayers are advised to raise a grievance through the Self-Service Portal available on the GST Portal, along with all relevant details, to facilitate prompt and effective resolution,” the GSTN said.

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...