GSTR-9 IGST ITC Eligible for Adjustment Despite Non-Claim in GSTR-3B: Calcutta HC Remands Matter [Read Order]

The Calcutta High Court has held that unclaimed Input Tax Credit ( ITC ) under IGST ( Integrated Goods and Services Tax ) disclosed in GSTR-9 cannot be ignored merely because it was not claimed earlier in GSTR-3B, observing that such credit must be duly considered for adjustment against tax demand.

The petitioner, Laxmi Ghosh, had mistakenly failed to claim IGST ITC for May, June and July 2018 in her GSTR-3B returns. After realising the mistake, she claimed the unavailed ITC, amounting to ₹3,54,457.99 in her GSTR-9 annual return for FY 2018-19. During proceedings under Section 73, she sought adjustment of this eligible IGST credit against the CGST and SGST demand raised for the same financial year.

Know the complete aspects of tax implications of succession, Click here

Despite this, the Appellate Authority dismissed her appeal, asserting that her claim was “devoid of logic, facts & proper explanation” and that “necessary documents” were missing.

The High Court, however, found these conclusions to be unsupported, noting that the Authority had not specified what documents were lacking, nor had it addressed the written submissions that were in fact placed before it.

Also Read:Bombay HC Slams Customs - Port Blame Game, Orders 9% Interest Refund as Importer Never Received Goods [Read Order]

Justice Om Narayan Rai also noted the Division Bench ruling in Pioneer Co-operative Car Parking Servicing and Constructions Society Ltd. v. State of West Bengal (2025), where the Court held that details furnished in GSTR-9 must be considered, and that disregarding the annual return would defeat the very purpose of Section 44(1) and Rule 80.

The High Court observed that the Appellate Authority had not explained why IGST credit declared in GSTR-9 should not be set-off against the departmental demand.

Accordingly, the Court remanded the case back to the Appellate Authority to take a fresh, reasoned decision in accordance with law. It allowed the petitioner to file any additional representations within two weeks and noted that she had already paid the net differential tax of ₹83,608.07, which could also be brought to the Authority’s notice.

Also, the Court clarified that it had not examined the merits of the ITC claim, leaving it open to proper reconsideration.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates