9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax credit - only ground on which the petitioner has been said to have availed the input tax credit is the difference between GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B - HELD THAT:- This Court, after taking note of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VERSUS M/S ECOM GILL COFFEE TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED [ 2023 (3) TMI 533 - SUPREME COURT ] as well as Calcutta High Court judgment in SUN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Respondent : Reshmita Ramachandran-GP JUDGMENT The present writ petition has been filed, impugning Ext. P1 assessment order and Ext. P2 recovery notice dated 28.12.2021 and 02.09.2023, respectively. The petitioner claims input tax credit to the extent of Rs. 2,58,116/- with interest and penalty. The total amount comes to approximately Rs. 4,58,156/-. 2. From the perusal of the Assessment Ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would read as under: 8. In view thereof, I find that 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted back to the file of the Assessing Authority/1st respondent to examine the evidence of the petitioner irrespective of the Form GSTR 2A for the petitioner's claim for the input tax credit. After examination of the evidence placed by the petitioner/assessee, the Assessing Authority shall pass fresh orders in accordance with the law. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Assessing O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
