IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 6883 OF 2026 (T-RES)

BETWEEN:

M/S. MANJUNATHA EXPORTS, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM CONSTITUTED UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, SRI. RAJINI G. K.

S/O C. S. GURUSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, NO. 554, 3^RD MAIN ROAD, 2^ND PHASE, 6^TH BLOCK, BANASHANKARI 3^RD STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 085.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH G., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by VIJAYA P AND:

Location:

HIGH COURT OF 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, KARNATAKA WEST DIVISION-5, BENGALURU WEST COMMISSIONERATE, 1^ST FLOOR, TTMC COMPLEX, BTMC BUS STAND, BANASHANKARI, BENGALURU-560070.

2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX (APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX (APPEALS).

S1 AND S2, VINAYA MARG, SIDDARTHA NAGAR, MYSURU-570 011.

3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, RANGE-CWD5, BENGALURU WEST COMMISSIONERATE, BMTC BUS STAND COMPLEX, FIRST FLOOR, BANASHANKARI, BENGLURU-560 070.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ARAVIND V. CHAVAN, ADVOCATE)

***

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO.07/2021-22 WD5 DC DATED 03.08.2021 BEARING DIN: 20210857YU000000E567 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the Order-in-Original at Annexure-A as well as the Order-in- Appeal at Annexure-B. The petitioner has also sought for refund of statutory pre-deposit made under Section 107(6) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'CGST Act').

2. The case made out by the petitioner is that the form GSTR-3B for the month of March-2019 came to be filed online by the petitioner though belatedly on 28.10.2019. It is stated that respondent No.1 has issued show-cause notice, proposing to demand Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to Rs.27,21,200/- which allegedly had been availed in contravention of the provision of Section

16(4) of the CGST Act.

3. It is the contention of the petitioner that the Assessing Authority had declined to permit the petitioner to claim ITC on the ground that it was belated in light of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act. It is submitted that by virtue of amendment to Section 16(5), which is a non- obstante clause, the time limit prescribed under Section 16(4) stood relaxed for the years of financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 till 30^th day of November, 2021. Accordingly, it is submitted that by virtue of such amendment to the Finance Act with effect from 01.07.2017, though the appointed date is 27.09.2024, the petitioner is entitled for credit to the ITC availed.

4. Perused the Order-in-Original and Order-in-

Appeal. The only ground on which steps were taken to deny ITC claim is that it was claimed beyond the period prescribed under Section 16(4). Section 16(4) and Section

16(5) of the CGST Act reads as hereunder:

"16. Eligibility and conditions for taking input tax credit.

(4) A registered person shall not be entitled to take input tax credit in respect of any invoice or debit note for supply of goods or services or both after the [thirtieth day of November] following the end of financial year to which such invoice or debit note pertains or furnishing of the relevant annual return, whichever is earlier. (5) Nothwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (4), in respect of an invoice or debit note for supply of goods or services or both pertaining to the Financial Years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21, the registered person shall be entitled to take input tax credit in any return under section 39 which is filed upto the thirtieth day of November, 2021."

5. It is pertinent to note that the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs vide Circular No. 237/31/2024-GST dated 15.10.202