Heard Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the assessee, Sri Manu Ghildiyal, learned counsel for the State and Sri Devendra Gupta, learned counsel for the Central Government.

Present writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus to allow the petitioner to revise GSTR 3B for the month of March, 2019. Writ of certiorari has also been sought with respect to the adjudication order dated 28.08.2019 passed by the respondent no.3 for the tax period March, 2019.

At the outset, a preliminary objection has been raised by Sri Manu Ghildiyal that no writ of mandamus may lie in these facts as there is no statutory obligation on the State GST authority to allow the petitioner to revise the GSTR 3B. Also he would contend that against the order dated 28.08.2019, there is a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of U.P. GST Act, 2017.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, undisputedly there is no statutory obligation existing on the State authorities to allow the petitioner to revise GSTR 3B for the month of March, 2019. The fact that under a circular some discretion has been granted may not be enough in the facts of the present case where, adjudication proceeding has also been concluded against the petitioner.

As to the challenge raised the adjudication order dated 28.08.2019, we find that the same is clearly appealable.

For those reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition in extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The further submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner unless the writ of mandamus is issued and the petitioner is allowed to revise GSTR 3B, he may never succeed in appeal, does not appeal to us. Once the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and it is contested that GSTR 3B for the month of March, 2019 suffered from inadvertent mistakes upon evidence led to establish that fact, the appellate authority would have to record a finding in that regard and adjudicate the issue accordingly. If any tax amount is found deposited in excess, over and above, the liability admitted or adjudged for the month of April, 2019, the petitioner may remain entitled to claim benefit of the same in appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law.

Thus, leaving all those courses and defence open to the petitioner and without adjudicating the issue on merit, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction, in case the petitioner files an appeal before the competent authority against the order dated 28.08.2019 within a period of two weeks from today along with a copy of this order, the said appeal may be entertained and decided on its own merit without raising objection as to limitation. This direction has been issued in view of the prevailing situation arising from the spread of the pandemic Covid-19.