9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 960 - HC - GSTDenial of Input Tax Credit - Disallowance on the ground that the details submitted in the petitioner's return did not tally with that in the GSTR-2A return - HELD THAT - The documents on record, such as invoice dated 20.09.2017 and the GSTR return of Kirthi Enterprises, prima facie indicate that the GSTIN of Premier Corporation was wrongly mentioned by Kirthi Enterprises in the return. If that is indeed the case, the petitioner would be unjustly deprived of ITC. In order to provide the petitioner with an opportunity to redress this grievance, interference with the impugned order is called for. The impugned order dated 25.08.2023 is quashed and the matter is remanded to the assessing officer. The assessing officer is directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a personal hearing, and thereafter issue a fresh assessment order within a period of two months thereafter. It is also open to the petitioner to file an appropriate petition, if necessary, to set right the error complained of by the petitioner. Petition disposed off.
Issues involved:
The disallowance of Input Tax Credit (ITC) claimed by the petitioner due to discrepancies between the petitioner's return and GSTR-2A return. Summary: The petitioner, a registered person under GST laws, challenged an assessment order disallowing claimed ITC based on discrepancies in returns. The petitioner clarified that an invoice was wrongly attributed to a sister concern by the supplier, Kirthi Enterprises. The petitioner's counsel highlighted the error in the supplier's return and argued for interference in the assessment order. The respondent, represented by the learned Additional Government Pleader, suggested rectification proceedings for the supplier's error. The Court observed that the supplier's return and invoice indicated the misrepresentation of GSTIN, potentially unjustly depriving the petitioner of ITC. Consequently, the Court quashed the assessment order, remanding the matter for reassessment by providing the petitioner with a reasonable opportunity for redressal. The Court directed the assessing officer to issue a fresh assessment order within two months, allowing the petitioner a personal hearing. Moreover, the petitioner was granted the option to file a petition to correct the error. The case was disposed of with no costs incurred, and related petitions were closed accordingly.
|
