IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.TH, J
M/S.K.V.JOSHY & C.K. PAUL – Appellant
Versus
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of CGST Act and this writ petition is submitted by the petitioner, challenging Ext.P3 show cause notice issued under Sec.73 of the CGST Act . As per Ext.P3 notice, the petitioner was directed to show cause, as to why the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner pertaining to the assessment year 2019-2020 should not be disallowed and recovered from the petitioner. In Ext.P3, a penalty was also sought to be imposed in respect of the same.
2. The facts which led to the issuance of Ext.P3, are as follows:-
In respect of the relevant financial year, the petitioner effected certain purchases which are covered by Exts.P5 to P72 invoices from the respondents 2 and 3. According to the petitioner, those are proper tax invoices in the relevant formats in the CGST Act and the respondents 2 and 3 have collected tax from the petitioner in respect of the same. The said documents contain e-way bills corresponding to the invoices issued, indicating the transportation of the goods covered by the invoices as well. On the basis of the same, the petitioner submitted it’s returns and claimed input tax credit in respect of invoices referred
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.