GST Amnesty Benefit Can’t Be Denied for Clerical Error | HC

Case Details: Big Peat Company vs. State Tax Officer - [2026] 185 taxmann.com 582 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.
• S. Karunakar for the Petitioner.
• R. Suresh Kumar, Addl. Govt. Pleader for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged the rejection of its application seeking a waiver under Section 128A of the CGST Act and the Tamil Nadu GST Act pursuant to the GST Amnesty Scheme, 2025. It was submitted that the assessment proceedings culminated in an adjudication order in which tax, interest, and penalty were quantified separately, and an appeal against such order remained pending. It was contended that upon the introduction of the scheme, it paid the tax dues and withdrew the appeal. The application was rejected on the ground that in the summary assessment the entire demand was treated as ‘penalty’ with nil tax and interest. The petitioner contended that this was an apparent clerical mistake, as the original order clearly included tax, interest, and penalty components, and hence the benefit under the scheme could not be denied. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the original adjudication order clearly quantified tax, interest, and a limited penalty, and mere misclassification of the entire demand as ‘penalty’ in the summary proceedings was an apparent clerical error. It held that such an error could not be perpetuated while considering an application under Section 128A of the CGST Act and the Tamil Nadu GST Act. The Court observed that the jurisdictional officer under CGST ought to have correctly appreciated the original order and treated the amounts under the appropriate heads while examining the claim. It was held that the denial of the benefit of the amnesty scheme solely on account of such a clerical mistake was unsustainable. Accordingly, the matter was remanded to the authority for fresh consideration.