2024 (2) TMI 1127 - HC - GST

Input Tax Credit - credit claimed and availed of by the petitioner under the TNVAT Act held to be wrongly availed - HELD THAT - The petitioner has placed on record the reply dated 01.12.2020, which bears the signature of the recepient and is dated 02.12.2020. The said communication refers to three refund orders, specifies the order numbers and the corresponding refund amounts. The communication also records that copies of the refund orders are enclosed with the communication. In these facts and circumstances, the interest of justice warrants that the petitioner be provided an opportunity to place these documents for the consideration of the assessing officer. Solely for that reason, the order impugned herein calls for interference. The impugned order dated 29.12.2023 is quashed and the matter is remanded for re-consideration. The petitioner shall submit all relevant documents to the assessing officer within a maximum period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The challenge to the order regarding the wrongly availed credit under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (TNVAT Act) and the subsequent need for reconsideration based on the relevant documents and communication provided by the petitioner.

Summary:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the TNVAT Act, claimed Input Tax Credit (ITC) and received refund orders for specific periods. A notice regarding transitioning the credit to the GST regime was received, to which the petitioner replied enclosing the refund orders. The impugned order reversed the credit due to the refund orders not being uploaded on the portal. The petitioner sought the opportunity to present the relevant documents before the assessing officer.

The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the credit reversal was solely due to the non-uploading of refund orders, emphasizing that the petitioner possesses the necessary documents. The Additional Government Pleader contended that the assessing officer's decision was justified as the refund orders were not uploaded. He also pointed out the absence of the officer's designation in the communication dated 01.12.2022.

The impugned order highlighted the absence of the refund orders on the portal despite the taxpayer's assertion of their existence based on the communication dated 01.12.2020. The petitioner provided the said communication, which detailed the refund orders, their numbers, amounts, and enclosed copies. In light of this, the court deemed it necessary to allow the petitioner to submit these documents for the assessing officer's consideration.

Consequently, the impugned order dated 29.12.2023 was quashed, and the matter was remanded for re-consideration. The petitioner was directed to submit all relevant documents within two weeks for the assessing officer's review, followed by a fresh order to be issued within two months. The case was disposed of with no costs incurred, and the related application was closed.