2022 (8) TMI 812 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - Wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit - HELD THAT - Without filing an appeal before the concerned authority, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this Writ Petition. The Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court, time and again, held that if there is an alternative and efficacious remedy of appeal, the petitioner can very well approach the concerned authority. Hence, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Appellate Authority by raising the points. The delay in filing appeal if any to be considered favourably. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned proceedings passed by respondent in a Writ Petition regarding GST input tax credits and payment issues.

Analysis:
The petitioner, running a Super Market, challenged the notice issued by the respondent regarding the availed Input Tax Credits (ITC) and short payment of tax during the assessment period. The petitioner contended that the ITC was wrongly availed due to technical reasons where their suppliers failed to upload invoices in GSTR 1 under B2B category, resulting in a shortfall in TNGST payment. The petitioner argued that they cannot be held responsible for their suppliers' actions and maintained that genuine transactions were conducted with regular payments made. A personal hearing was conducted, but the submissions made were not adequately considered, with the petitioner's representative highlighting that suppliers were not familiar with transaction payments initially.

The petitioner's counsel referred to a press release by the Central Board of GST council, stating that reversal of credit from the buyer is an option available in exceptional situations, with recovery primarily made from the seller. Additionally, Notification No.40/2021- Central Tax was cited, emphasizing the conditions for availing input tax credit, effective from January 1, 2022. The counsel also relied on a previous court order that provided a positive direction to another petitioner based on the same press release, seeking similar benefits for the current petitioner.

While a detailed order was passed by the Adjudicating Authority after considering the petitioner's objections and conducting a personal hearing, the court highlighted that the petitioner should have pursued an appeal before the concerned authority instead of directly approaching the court through a Writ Petition. The court emphasized the importance of exhausting alternative remedies like the appellate authority before seeking judicial intervention. The petitioner was directed to approach the Appellate Authority to raise their points, with any delay in filing the appeal to be considered favorably.

In conclusion, the Writ Petition was disposed of with the direction for the petitioner to pursue the appeal through the appropriate authority, emphasizing the need to exhaust alternative remedies before resorting to court intervention.