IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Krishnan Ramasamy, J.
Nilgiris Silverline Builders Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
The Deputy State Tax Officer, Nilgiris - Respondent
W.P. No. 4718 of 2025, W.M.P. Nos. 5239, 5240 of 2025
Decided On : 12-02-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. issue covered by common order (Para 3) |
| 2. orders quashed (Para 4) |
| 3. writ petition allowed (Para 5 , 6) |
ORDER :
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner/taxpayer, who is registered dealer on the file of the respondent-Department under the provisions of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act)/Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST Act) as the case may be, challenging the order passed by the respondent-Department, whereby, the claim of ITC was reversed/negatived and consequently, the petitioner has been directed to pay tax/penalty/interest.
2. As the issue involved in this Writ Petition, is identical in nature and the relief sought thereunder, is interconnected, this Writ Petition is being disposed of, with the same lines.
3. When this Writ Petition is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the respondent, would submit that the issue involved in the present Writ Petition, has been squarely covered by the common order of this Court, dated 17.10.2024 passed in W.P.Nos.25081 of 2023, etc., batch, wherein, this Court has categorically held in paragraphs 9 to 12 as under:
“9. The petitioners in all these Writ Petitions are registered dealers on the files of the respondent-Department under the provisions of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017/CGST Act 2017. Though the petitioners have filed GSTR-1 returns in time, however, insofar as claim of ITC is concerned, since the petitioners were faced with certain difficulties, such as Financial constraints (as there was complete lock down due to outbreak Covid-19) health related ailments, fire accidents, they were unable to file GSTR-3B returns, which prompted them not raising their claim ITC in time before the prescribed date. Whereas, the respondent- Department without considering such vital aspects and that reasons for the delay is not deliberate, issued the show cause notices to the petitioners, proposing to reverse the ITC availed and went to the extreme level of confirming the proposals contained in the show cause notices by passing the impugned orders,whereby, the claim made by the petitioners for ITC was reversed and the petitioners have been directed to tax/penalty/interest. Aggrieved against the impugned orders, the petitioners are before this Court by way of present Writ Petitions seeking for setting aside the impugned orders.
10. After the filing of these Writ Petitions, certain development took place, i.e. that 53rd GST Council Meeting was held on 22.06.2024, and during the said Meeting, the GST Council recommended for extension of the deadline for availing ITC on any invoice or debit note under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act and this extension would be applicable to any GSTR-3B returns filed for the Fys 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 with a new deadline deemed to be as ''30.11.2021'' to which, the Presidential Assent was also obtained by the Government of India on 16.08.2024, whereby, the financial proposals of the Central Government for the Financial Year 2024-25 was given effect to vide Finance Act, (No.2) of 2024, and in view of the aforesaid enactment, the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, issued a Notification, bearing No.17 of 2024-Central Tax, dated 27.09.2024, pursuant to which, a Circular No.237/31/2024-GST was issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, which was addressed to all the Principal Chief Commissioners /Chief Commissioners/Principal Commissioners/ Commissioners of Central Tax (All), thereby, clarifying the issues regarding implementation of provision of sub-section (5) and sub- section (6) in Section 16 of CGST Act, 2017, the impugned orders are no longer sustainable and liable to be quashed. In this context, it would be apposite to refer to both Section16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, as well as amendment made to Section 16 (4) by interpolations of sub-sections 16 (5) and (6), and by insertion of sub
The amendment to Section 16 of the GST Act allows for the availing of Input Tax Credit within an extended deadline, quashing previous orders that reversed such claims due to late filing.
The amendment to Section 16(5) of the CGST Act allows registered dealers to claim ITC for specified financial years until 30.11.2021, overriding previous limitations.
Court ruled that registered dealers entitled to Input Tax Credit despite delays in filing due to valid reasons, following amendments to GST law retroactively extending deadlines for claims.
The court ruled that taxpayers can avail Input Tax Credit on late filings due to exceptional circumstances, as amended provisions of the GST Act allowed for extended deadlines retroactively, quashing....
Amendment to Section 16(5) of the CGST Act permits registered persons to avail ITC beyond the limitation previously set by Section 16(4) for specific financial years.
The court ruled that amendments to the Goods and Services Tax Act allow retroactive claims for input tax credit despite prior limitations, thus quashing earlier orders penalizing delayed filings.
The amendment to Section 16 of the CGST Act allowing ITC claims until 30.11.2021 applies retrospectively, entitling registered dealers to their claims despite previous limitations.
The amendment to Section 16(5) of the CGST Act allows registered persons to claim input tax credit for specified financial years despite initial limitations.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.