9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (5) TMI 968 - HC - GSTRejection of appeal filed - requirement of pre-deposit - blocking of ITC - HELD THAT - Reliance placed in the case of M/S. LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED, CHENNAI REGIONAL OFFICE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER (INDIRECT TAXES) K. PATTABIRAMAN VERSUS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) 2023 (9) TMI 271 - MADRAS HIGH COURT to state that the petitioner is not required to pre-deposit any amount disputed. In the present case, dispute pertains to denial of input tax credit. Therefore, the petitioner cannot deposit any amount from its electronic credit ledger. The petitioner has to pre deposit 10% of the disputed amount from its electronic cash ledger. There cannot be a pre deposit of the amount as is contemplated u/s. 107 of GST Act, 2017 from the petitioner's electronic credit ledger. The writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to deposit the amount u/s. 105 of the disputed amount through cash or through its electronic credit ledger within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - petition dismissed.
Issues involved: Petitioner challenging impugned order rejecting appeal against Order-in-Original No.1 of 2021-GST, related to denial of input tax credit and requirement of pre-deposit.
Summary: Issue 1: Pre-deposit requirement for disputed input tax credit: The petitioner contended that no pre-deposit should be required for the disputed input tax credit, citing a previous court decision. However, the court ruled that a pre-deposit of 10% of the disputed amount from the electronic cash ledger is necessary, not from the electronic credit ledger as per section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. Issue 2: Dismissal of Writ Petition with liberty to deposit amount: The court held that the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed, but granted the petitioner liberty to deposit the disputed amount under section 105 within 30 days. Upon compliance, the impugned order would be quashed, and the appeal would be reinstated for the 1st respondent to decide on merits within six weeks, ensuring the petitioner's right to be heard. In conclusion, the Writ petition was dismissed with liberty to deposit the amount as per section 105, and no costs were awarded. The connected miscellaneous petitions were closed accordingly.
|
