9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 1101 - HC - GSTWrong availment and utilization of ITC - ITC claim was rejected for non submission of documents - HELD THAT - The petitioner did not submit any documents relating to movement of goods, mode of transport and physical movement of goods, and that the proposal for levy of tax, penalty and interest is found to be in order as a consequence. The petitioner has placed on record invoices and E-way bills relating to the relevant purchases. The E-way bills contain details of not only the products purchased by the petitioner but also the vehicles used for the movement of goods. The impugned order does not contain any discussion on the documents produced by the petitioner to corroborate the assertion that legitimate purchases were made and point out deficiencies or inadequacies. On that ground, the impugned order calls for interference. Therefore, the impugned orders dated 03.07.2023 are quashed. These matters are remanded for re-consideration. The second respondent is directed to re-consider the matter and issue a fresh assessment order after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner - Petition allowed by way of remand.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in this judgment are the alleged contravention of Section 16(2)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TNGST Act) for the financial years 2020-21 and 2021-22. Summary: Issue 1: Wrong availment and utilization of Input Tax Credit (ITC) The petitioner, engaged in the business of dealing in copper waste and scrap, was issued notices regarding alleged contravention of the TNGST Act. The petitioner responded with relevant ledger accounts, tax invoices, and E-way bills to support the claim that ITC was not wrongly availed. However, the explanation provided by the petitioner was rejected in the impugned orders dated 03.07.2023. The petitioner contended that the Assessing Officer did not consider the documents provided to show the proper purchase and delivery of input goods. The Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) pointed out that the ITC claim was rejected due to non-submission of documents. The impugned order noted the absence of valid supportive documents for the physical movement of goods, leading to the confirmation of tax, penalty, and interest proposals. However, the petitioner had submitted invoices and E-way bills detailing the purchases and transportation of goods, which were not adequately addressed in the impugned order. Consequently, the High Court quashed the impugned orders and remanded the matters for re-consideration, directing the second respondent to issue a fresh assessment order after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. In conclusion, the writ petitions were disposed of with no costs, and related motions were closed as per the above terms.
|
