9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 47 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxReversal on Input tax credit - denial on the ground that the information available on the Department s website did not match with the information supplied by the petitioner - Held that - reversal of ITC, on the basis of a mere mismatch in information, could not have taken place - similar issue has been decided in the case of INFINITI WHOLESALE LIMITED VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT), KOYAMBEDU ASSESSMENT CIRCLE, KOYAMBEDU, CHENNAI 2015 (1) TMI 590 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.
Issues involved: Challenge to the reversal of Input Tax Credits (ITC) based on a mismatch in information provided by the petitioner in monthly returns for the year 2013-2014.
Analysis: 1. The petitioner challenged the order dated 12.12.2016, which reversed the Input Tax Credits (ITC) due to a mismatch in information provided by the petitioner and the Department's website for the year 2013-2014, amounting to ?1,54,585.00 after adjustments. 2. The main contention raised was that the reversal of ITC solely on the basis of a mismatch in information was unjustified. The petitioner's counsel cited relevant judgments, including ALTHAF SHOES (P) LTD. VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT), SRI VINAYAGA AGENCIES VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT), and INFINITI WHOLESALE LIMITED VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT), to support their argument against the reversal of ITC. 3. The respondent, represented by the Additional Government Pleader, acknowledged that the issue was indeed covered by the judgments cited by the petitioner and did not contest the applicability of those judgments. 4. The High Court noted that a Division Bench had previously ruled in a similar manner in a related case titled The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Presently Thiruverkadu Assessment Circle, Chennai Vs. M/s.Infiniti Wholesale Ltd., supporting the petitioner's argument against the reversal of ITC based on a mere mismatch in information. 5. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order that reversed the ITC and directed the respondent to rework the assessment considering the judgments referred to in the case. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
|
