IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
GOLDEN MIST TRADING – Appellant
Versus
STATE TAX OFFICER, TAX PAYER SERVICES CIRCLE – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 11515 OF 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner is a registered taxpayer under the cgst act. (Para 1) |
| 2. the court emphasizes the significance of section 16(5) in allowing input tax credits despite delays. (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a registered taxpayer under the provisions of the CGST/KGST Act. The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P4 order in original passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act . The challenge is raised mainly on the ground that, as per the impugned order, the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner was declined for the months of November 2018 to March 2019. The reason is that the petitioner failed to submit the returns within the period stipulated under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act . The challenge is raised mainly on the ground that the petitioner is entitled to claim the input tax credit in the light of Section 16(5) of the Act, as the petitioner had submitted all the said returns before the cut off date contemplated in the said provision, which is
30.11.2021.
2. On perusal of Ext.P4 order, it is seen that the petitioner had submitted all the relevant returns on 30.11.2019, and thus the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Section 16(5) of the Act. This is particularly because, Section 16(5) contains a non obstante clause with regard to Section 16(4), and therefore, once the taxpayer submits the returns within the cut off date contemplated under Section 16(5), the timeline contemplated under Section 16(4) loses its significance. In such circumstances an interference is required.
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.