9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 627 - HC - GSTBlocking of Input Tax Credit (ITC) - supplier/selling dealer was found to be non-existent at his disclosed place of business - HELD THAT - Perusal of Annexure no.7 to the writ petition clearly indicates that the said M/s Pushpendra Singh had applied for amendment of core field in registration particulars, including as to the place of business - to be amended and changed from Hapur to Ghaziabad. That change was applied for on 06.10.2023 i.e. four days prior to the impugned communication. On 31.10.2023, GSTN recorded that change and issued due communication to M/s Pushpendra Singh to record the change of address of his principal place of business from Hapur to Ghaziabad. At present, it does appear, for reason of time consumed in processing the application dated 06.10.2023, that change of address of M/s Pushpendra Singh may not have been known to the respondent no.3 when he passed the order dated 10.10.2023. In view of such facts, since the order dated 10.10.2023 is wholly ex-parte, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petition pending or calling for counter affidavit at this stage. Petition disposed off.
Issues involved: Challenge to the order blocking Input Tax Credit (ITC) under Rule 86A of Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 based on the genuineness of the supplier's existence at the disclosed place of business.
Summary: The judgment by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court addressed the challenge to the order blocking ITC of value Rs. 53,61,832/- under Rule 86A of Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The respondent, Assistant Commissioner (Special Investigation Branch), State Tax, Range-B, Ghaziabad, had blocked the ITC on the grounds that the supplier, M/s Pushpendra Singh, was found to be non-existent at the disclosed place of business in District Hapur. However, it was revealed that M/s Pushpendra Singh had applied for an amendment to change the place of business from Hapur to Ghaziabad, a change that was processed after the impugned communication. The Court noted that the order dated 10.10.2023 was ex-parte and directed the petitioner to file an application before the respondent for recalling the order, after which the respondent was instructed to verify the correct facts from the GSTN and pass an appropriate and reasoned order within one week. In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the direction for the respondent to reconsider the order blocking ITC in light of the updated information regarding the change of address of M/s Pushpendra Singh.
|
