In a recent decision, the Orissa High Court addressed a case involving Baba Enterprisers, which mistakenly credited GST to the incorrect GSTIN of Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (RVNL) due to a clerical error. This error occurred during the filing of returns for the first quarter of the fiscal year 2023-24, leading to a withholding of payments to the petitioner. When Baba Enterprisers sought rectification, the authorities refused, citing the lack of a mechanism on their portal and the expiration of correction timelines. Consequently, Baba Enterprisers filed a writ petition to seek the necessary correction.
The central issue before the court was whether the GST authorities are required to allow rectification of returns when the tax has been incorrectly credited to a different GSTIN of the same recipient due to a clerical error.
Read More: GST – Delhi High Court: Cancellation of GST registration with retrospective effect is invalid when the SCN did not propose retrospective action
The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, stating that the incorrect GSTIN entry is a clerical error that qualifies as a "mistake apparent on record," and therefore can be corrected under Section 161 of the CGST Act. The court emphasized that limitations of the portal or expired timelines should not prevent corrections when the facts are undisputed, and there is no risk of revenue loss or double claims.
The court directed the authorities to permit the amendment or rectification of the returns and to address the petitioner’s representation within eight weeks. It underscored the importance of a pragmatic approach, where the substance of the transaction should take precedence over form, particularly when the deposit is intended for the same recipient.
Order date: 22 Sept 2025
Parties: Baba Enterprisers v. Union of India & Ors.
Facts -
- The Petitioner supplied goods to Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (RVNL). While filing returns for Q1 FY 2023–24, GST was wrongly credited to RVNL’s TDS GSTIN instead of its regular GSTIN.
- This mistake led to withholding of petitioners payment. Petitioner sought rectification, but authorities declined citing absence of portal mechanism and lapse of timelines. Writ petition filed seeking correction.
Issue -
- Whether GST authorities are obliged to permit rectification of returns when tax has been wrongly credited to a different GSTIN of the same recipient due to clerical error?
Order -
- The court held that incorrect GSTIN entry is a clerical error and qualifies as a “mistake apparent on record,” rectifiable under Section 161 CGST Act.
- Portal limitations or lapsed timelines cannot bar correction where facts are undisputed and no revenue loss or double claim arises.
- Authorities directed to permit amendment/rectification of returns and decide petitioner’s representation within 8 weeks.
- Court emphasised pragmatic approach: substance must prevail over form, especially when the deposit is to the same recipient.
