2025 (1) TMI 107 - HC - GST

Disallowance of Input Tax Credit only on the ground that the claims have been lodged beyond the period prescribed under Section 16(4) of the GST Acts - HELD THAT - The impugned order passed by the respondent dated 28.12.2023 is set aside. The learned assessing/adjudicating authority/ respondent shall re-do the assessment by taking into account the amendment referred supra. The petitioner may submit their objection by way of reply, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with the amendment and other details. If any such reply is filed, the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Petition disposed off.

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal questions considered in this judgment are:

Whether the disallowance of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the period 2017-2018 based on claims being lodged beyond the prescribed period under Section 16(4) of the GST Acts is valid in light of the recent amendment to the GST Acts.
Whether the amendment introduced by Section 118 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, which inserts new subsections into Section 16 of the GST Acts, affects the validity of the assessment order dated 28.12.2023.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1: Validity of ITC Disallowance Based on Time Limit

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The assessment order disallowed ITC based on Section 16(4) of the GST Acts, which sets a time limit for claiming ITC. However, the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, introduced Section 16(5), allowing ITC claims for certain financial years until November 30, 2021.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court recognized the amendment as a significant change in the legal framework, impacting the validity of the disallowance of ITC based on the previous time limit.
Key Evidence and Findings: The court noted the introduction of Section 16(5) and its retrospective application from July 1, 2017, which directly affects the assessment for the period 2017-2018.
Application of Law to Facts: The court applied the amended provisions to the facts of the case, determining that the assessment order must be reconsidered in light of the new legal framework.
Treatment of Competing Arguments: The petitioner argued that the amendment nullifies the basis for the disallowance, while the respondent agreed to re-do the assessment considering the amendment.
Conclusions: The court concluded that the assessment order dated 28.12.2023 should be set aside, and the assessment must be re-done in accordance with the amended provisions.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

Preserve Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning: "In view thereof, the impugned order passed by the respondent dated 28.12.2023 is set aside. The learned assessing/adjudicating authority/ respondent shall re-do the assessment by taking into account the amendment referred supra."
Core Principles Established: The judgment establishes that amendments to tax legislation that provide retrospective relief must be considered in ongoing assessments, and prior disallowances based on superseded provisions must be re-evaluated.
Final Determinations on Each Issue: The court determined that the assessment order is to be set aside and remanded for reconsideration in light of the amendment. The petitioner is allowed to submit objections, and the respondent must provide a reasonable opportunity for a hearing before issuing a new order.

This judgment highlights the importance of legislative amendments in tax assessments and underscores the necessity for tax authorities to adapt to changes in the legal framework to ensure fair and lawful assessments.

← Previous Next →