SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 72094

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice C. SARAVANAN
Tvl Nimo Productions – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.12.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.M.P.No s . 5 2110 & 5 2114 of 2025 Tvl.Nimo Productions, (Represented by its Proprietor, Mr.Krishnan), No.20/3, Nakiran Street, West Mambalam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 033. ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Kodambakkam Assessment Circle, No.1, 4th Floor, PAPJM Annex Building, Greams Road, Chennai – 600 006.

2. The State Tax Officer, Kodambakkam Assessment Circle, No.1, 4th Floor, PAPJM Annex Building, Greams Road, Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the files of the 1st respondent herein in his order in FORM GST DRC-07 with Reference No.ZD330225194022T dated 19.02.2025 issued along with the detailed order in GSTIN:33AAFPB8610G2Z7/2020-21 dated 19.02.2025 for the tax period April 2020 to March 2021 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Syed Abdul Wakeel For Respondents : Mr.TNC Kaushik, Additional Government Pleader ********* O R D E R In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated

19.02.2025, which was preceeded by a Show Cause Notice dated 26.11.2024, the petitioner was issued with reminders on 24.01.2025, 15.02.2025 and 15.03.2025, the petitioner, however did not file a reply and thus suffered the impugned order dated 19.02.2025.

2. On the basis of the information, records and data available with the Department, and the objection filed by the assessee, the order has been confirmed for the defects mentioned in the show cause notice issued, under the following heads:-

(i) Excess claim of ITC The excess input tax credit (ITC) claimed on account of non-reconciliation of information declared in GSTR-3B:

It is observed that the taxpayer has not correctly availed input tax on his inward supplies on reconciliation of turnovers in GSTR-3B.

Excess ITC availed in GSTR-3B compared to the tax on inward supplies declared by the suppliers You have availed excess ITC in GSTR-3B as compared to the tax declared by your suppliers on the supplies made to you. GSTR-1 filed by supplier up to the tax period of September of following FY till the cut-off date has been considered for availiability of ITC. For the FY:Apr 20-Mar

21, the cut-off date is 30 Nov, 2021.

S. Description Table No. in GSTR-3B SGST CGST IGST CESS Total No

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 ITC availed in4 A(5) 324768 324768 0 0 649536 GSTR-3B

2 Tax declared by theC umulative figures of GSTR-013 184 3184 0 0 6368 suppliers on thef iled by suppliers supplies made to you

3 Invalid ITS as theC umulative figures of GSTR-01 0 0 0 0 supplier has filedf iled by suppliers after the cut-

GSTR-01 after the off date cut-off date

4 Ineligible ITC Table 4D of GSTR 3B 0 0 0 0 0

5 Excess ITC availed 321584 321584 0 0 643168 {S.No.1-S.No4} (-)

{S.No.2-S.No.3}

(ii) Invalid ITC under Sec 16(4)

Under Sec.16(4) of the CGST & SGST Acts, 2017, a registered person shall not be entitled to take input tax credit for supply of goods or services after the due date of furnishing the return under Sec.39 for the month of September, Apr 20-Mar 21 (FY) i.e., 30 Nov,2021. However, it is observed that, you have availed input tax credit after this due date. Therefore, you are not entitled to the ITC claimed in the GST 3B return as below:

S. Tax Period Dt.of filing of return ITC claimed No SGST CGST IGST CESS Total

1 2 3 4a 4b 4c 4d 4e

1 Nov,2020 2022-04-19 144 144 0 0 288

2 Dec,2020 2022-04-20 0 0 0 0 0

3 Jan,2021 2022-04-20 322677 322677 0 0 645354

4 Feb,2021 2022-04-20 144 144 0 0 288

5 Mar,2021 2022-04-20 327 327 0 0 654 The above amount of ITC is proposed to be recovered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitoiner submits that there is an overlap, as part of the demand has arisen from excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) claimed on account of non-reconciliation of the information declared in GSTR-3B.

4. Prima facie, it appears that there is an overlap insofar as th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top