9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 640 - HC - GSTSeeking for correction of an invoice for the purpose of availing input tax credit - denial of Input Tax Credit - levy of IGST or CGST and SGST? HELD THAT - In the present case, the petitioner is a dealer registered under the BGST Act and the sale was effected from the State of Jharkhand. However, there is absolutely nothing to prove the movement of goods to the State of Bihar - There can be no understanding between the parties to the transaction that what has been paid as SGST and CGST is to be deemed to be paid as IGST without due compliance of th provisions of the taxation enactment. Such understanding cannot also regulate an input tax credit without such credit being shown in the ledger account maintained by the assessee with the Department. The invoice is one issued in assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner has filed the above writ petition in the year 2021 when the enabling provision for claiming input tax credit would not have been available in any event. Section 16(4) of the BGST Act, enables the input tax credit to be taken in respect of any invoice or debit note, in the case of a supplier, goods or services or both, after the due date of furnishing of the return under Section 39, in the month of September following the end of financial year to which such invoice relating to such debit note pertains or furnishing of the relevant annual return, whichever is earlier. The present invoice is dated 23.10.2017 and hence, the input tax credit has to be claimed before 28.11.2017 or furnishing of the annual return for the assessment year 2017-18, whichever is earlier. There is absolutely no possibility of the input tax credit being availed of at this point. There are no reason to direct the Railways to issue a revised invoice nor can the same be permitted - petition dismissed.
Issues involved:
The petitioner seeks correction of an invoice for availing input tax credit under the goods and services tax regime. Summary: Issue 1: Correct tax levy on the invoice The petitioner, a partnership firm engaged in sale and purchase of scrap materials, applied for an e-auction by East Central Railways. The successful bid resulted in a sale invoice with CGST and SGST levied at 9% each. However, it was later realized that IGST should have been levied instead, as the goods were taken possession of in Jharkhand and moved outside the State. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus for the issuance of a fresh invoice to avail input tax credit. Issue 2: Movement of goods and tax liability Despite the goods being delivered in Jharkhand and the sale appearing as a local one, the petitioner received the goods in Jharkhand without proving movement to Bihar. The Railways' statement deeming the tax collected as IGST cannot enable the petitioner to claim input tax credit without proper compliance with taxation laws. The absence of evidence showing movement outside Jharkhand further weakens the petitioner's claim. Issue 3: Timeliness of claiming input tax credit The invoice in question was issued in the assessment year 2017-18, and the writ petition was filed in 2021. The enabling provision for claiming input tax credit under Section 16(4) of the BGST Act required claiming credit before November 28, 2017, or furnishing the annual return for the assessment year 2017-18. As the deadline had passed, the court found no grounds to direct the Railways to issue a revised invoice or permit the petitioner to claim input tax credit at this point. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing the lack of evidence for movement of goods outside Jharkhand, the untimeliness of claiming input tax credit, and the inability to direct the Railways to issue a revised invoice.
|
