2021 (4) TMI 80 - HC - GST

Enhancement of CENVAT Credit - applicability of first proviso to Section 140(8) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The difference quantified by the petitioner is an amount equivalent to ₹ 7,44,483/-. The matter requires examination - Issue notice. Mr. Harpreet Singh, who appears on advance notice, accepts service on behalf of the respondent.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Appeal against order of Joint Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax, Appeals-1, Delhi regarding CENVAT credit claimed by the petitioner.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Availability of Statutory Remedy:
The petitioner did not opt for the statutory remedy of appeal to the GST Tribunal against the order dated 07.08.2020 due to the non-functional status of the GST Tribunal. Both parties, represented by Mr. Rajesh Jain and Mr. Harpreet Singh, acknowledged this fact.

2. Controversy Regarding CENVAT Credit:
Mr. Rajesh Jain, representing the petitioner, outlined the sequence of events related to the CENVAT credit claimed. Initially, the petitioner filed a return for the period 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017 claiming CENVAT credit of &8377; 15,86,548/-. Subsequently, the petitioner revised the return, increasing the claimed CENVAT credit to &8377; 23,31,031/-. Mr. Jain argued that since this was an enhancement of CENVAT credit, the petitioner could not have utilized the first proviso to Section 140(8) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the Act).

3. Legal Contentions:
Mr. Jain contended that the petitioner should have utilized Section 142(9)(b) of the Act for the difference between the original and enhanced amounts of CENVAT credit, which amounted to &8377; 7,44,483/-. The prayers in the writ petition were aligned with this argument.

4. Court's Direction:
The Court acknowledged the need for further examination of the matter and issued notice to the respondent, represented by Mr. Harpreet Singh. The respondent accepted the service, and a counter affidavit was directed to be filed within three weeks. Any rejoinder was to be submitted before the next hearing scheduled for 25.05.2021.

This judgment primarily revolves around the petitioner's appeal against the order concerning the CENVAT credit claimed, emphasizing the procedural aspects and legal provisions under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court's decision to delve deeper into the matter and seek responses from both parties indicates a thorough scrutiny of the controversy to ensure a just resolution.