9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 955X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has to discharge the burden of proof regarding the remittance of tax to the seller dealer by giving evidence as mentioned in the Judgment of the Supreme Court in THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VERSUS M/S ECOM GILL COFFEE TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED [ 2023 (3) TMI 533 - SUPREME COURT] . The impugned Exhibit P-1 assessment order so far denial of the input tax credit to the petitioner is not sustainable, and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer to give opportunity to the petitioner for his claim for input tax credit. -If on examination of the evidence submitted by the petitioner, the assessing officer is satisfied that the claim is bonafide and genuine, the petitioner should be given input tax credit. Merely on the ground that in Form GST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the Judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta in MAT 1218 of 2023 (Suncraft Energy Private Limited and Another v. The Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ballygunge Charge and others) delivered on 02.08.2023 . The Learned Counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2023 (3) TMI 533 SC (The State of Karnataka v. M/s. Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited) . 3. For a dealer to be eligible to avail credit of any input tax, the conditions prescribed in Section 16 (2) of the GST Act has to be fulfilled. Sub-section 2 of Section 16 commences with a non-obstinate clause stating that notwithstanding anything contained in Section 16 (1) no registered person shall be entitled to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -3B conducted before the due date for filing of the return in Form GSTR-3B for a particular month will be unfounded and the same exercise can be done thereafter also. The Supreme Court in Union of India (UOI) v. Bharti Airtel Ltd. And Others reported in 2022 (4) SCC 328 has opined that Form GSTR-2A is only a facilitator for taking a confirm decision while making the self-assessment. The High Court of Judicature at Calcutta in Suncraft Energy Private Limited and Another (supra) considering the provisions of Section 16 and press release dated 04.05.2018 and 18.10.2018 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Tax and Customs has held that non-performance or non-operatability of Form GSTR-2A or for that matter, other forms will be of no avail be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enue. It has been further held that mere production of the invoices or the payment made by cheques is not enough and cannot be said to be discharging the burden of proof cast under Section 70 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The dealer claiming ITC has to prove beyond doubt the actual transaction which can be proved by furnishing the name and address of the selling dealer, details of the vehicle which has delivered the goods, payment of freight charges, acknowledgment of taking delivery of goods, tax invoices and payment particulars etc. The genuineness of the transaction has to be proved as the burden to prove the genuineness of transaction would be upon the purchasing dealer. It has been held that mere production of the invoice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
