9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (12) TMI 59 - HC - GSTTime limitation - dismissal of appeal on the ground that the delay in filing the appeal is not liable to be condoned under Section 107 (4) of the KGST Act - HELD THAT - Having regard to the contentions put forth by both the learned counsels, without going into the question as to the correctness or otherwise of the order dated 08.08.2024 (Annexure-A) passed by the Appellate Authority refusing to condone the delay having regard to the order passed in the case of M/s. Sadhana Enviro Engineering Services2, under the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, relief sought for by the petitioner is liable to be granted in terms of the orders passed in the case of M/s. Sadhana Enviro Engineering Services2. The order dated 27.03.2024 bearing No. ACCT (Audit)-2/HPT/GST-ADJN/ORDER-2023/24/T for F.Y.2018-19 (Annexure L1) passed by respondent No. 1 is set aside - writ petition is partly allowed.
Issues:
1. Quashing of the impugned Appellate Order dated 08.08.2024 under Section 107 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2. Restoration of the appeal of the Petitioner in Form GST APL-01 dated 31-07-2024. 3. Quashing of the order dated 27.03.2024 passed by respondent No. 1. 4. Entitlement to claim input tax credit under Section 16 (4) and Section 16 (5) of the KGST Act. 5. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal under Section 107 of the KGST Act. Analysis: 1. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking relief to quash the Appellate Order dated 08.08.2024 and restore their appeal dated 31-07-2024. The petitioner, engaged in manpower supply services, was issued a show-cause notice under Section 73 (1) of the KGST Act, leading to a tax demand order dated 27.03.2024. The appeal was dismissed by the 3rd Respondent on grounds of delay in filing. The petitioner contended that the retrospective amendment in Section 16 (5) of the KGST Act allows claiming input tax credit for specified financial years if returns are filed by 30th November 2021, which should be considered in the adjudication. The petitioner relied on a judgment supporting their claim. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is entitled to benefit from the amendment in Section 16 (5) of the KGST Act, despite the delay in filing the appeal. The learned AGA did not dispute this entitlement but argued against condoning the appeal delay as per Section 107 (4) of the KGST Act. The court, considering the arguments, found that the petitioner is entitled to claim the benefit of Section 16 (5) of the KGST Act and granted relief based on previous judgments. 3. The court partially allowed the writ petition, setting aside the order dated 27.03.2024 and the Appellate Order dated 08.08.2024. The parties were directed back to the show-cause notice dated 21.12.2023, with instructions to grant benefit under Section 16 (5) of the KGST Act. The petitioner was given the opportunity to appear before the respondent and file a reply to the notice, presenting all legal contentions available. The court's decision was based on the petitioner's entitlement to the benefit of the legislative amendment and the peculiar circumstances of the case. 4. The judgment highlights the importance of statutory amendments and their retrospective application in tax matters. It emphasizes the need for authorities to consider such amendments while adjudicating disputes and granting reliefs to taxpayers. The court's decision ensures fairness and adherence to the law while providing the petitioner with the opportunity to avail entitled benefits under the amended provisions of the KGST Act.
|
