CA Certificate Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because It Was Issued After Transactions: GSTAT Lucknow

The Lucknow Bench of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) on 6 October held that a Chartered Accountant's (CA) certificate supporting an Input Tax Credit (ITC) claim cannot be rejected solely because it was issued after the transactions in question, provided its contents can be verified against contemporaneous records.

A Bench comprising Judicial Member Narendra Kumar and Technical Member Alok Chopra allowed Rameshwar Gupta's appeal against the rejection of his ITC claim for the financial year 2017-18 over discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A. It observed:

“Its subsequent date does not, by itself, render it inadmissible, particularly when the matters certified are capable of correlation with the books, invoices, returns and other contemporaneous records. The certificate is, therefore, to be appreciated as corroborative material and not discarded merely on the ground of the date on which it was issued.”

The dispute arose after the GST department questioned Gupta's ITC claim because the figures reported in GSTR-3B did not match those reflected in GSTR-2A. The department raised a tax demand, which Gupta challenged before the appellate authority. However, the authority rejected his appeal after he failed to attend the hearing due to medical reasons.

Before the Tribunal, Gupta relied on a CA certificate dated 14 July 2026 concerning transactions from the financial year 2017-18. The GST department opposed its consideration, arguing that the certificate had been issued much later and should have been produced at an earlier stage. He argued that the certificate merely corroborated transactions that had already taken place and that its later issuance did not alter the underlying facts.

He also relied on CBIC Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST, which prescribes a procedure for verifying ITC claims where discrepancies arise between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A for the financial years 2017-18 and 2018-19.

The Tribunal held that the circular applied to pending cases and allowed supporting documents to be examined to verify the ITC claim. It further clarified that a mismatch between GST returns, by itself, does not establish that ITC was wrongly claimed. The tax officer must examine the relevant invoices, books of account, payment records and other supporting documents.

Accordingly, the GSTAT set aside the earlier orders and the consequential demand for tax, interest and penalty, remanding the matter to the tax officer for fresh verification of Gupta's ITC claim.

For the Appellant: Dr. Swayambhav Manu, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Rajesh Kumar Singh, Deputy Commissioner, SGST.