Mina Bazar Vs State Tax Officer-1
Date: September 18, 2023
Subject Matter
Denial of input tax credit based on the difference between GSTR 2A and 3B is not sustainable.
Summary
The case describes a writ petition that has been filed to challenge an assessment order and a recovery notice related to the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner. The Assessment Order is based on the difference between GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B. The petitioner argues that the input tax credit cannot be denied solely based on this difference, citing relevant judgments. The court in a previous case has held that the denial of input tax credit based on the difference between GSTR 2A and 3B is not sustainable, and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Authority for further examination of the evidence. The present writ petition is allowed, and the Assessing Authority is directed to re-examine the evidence and pass fresh orders in accordance with the law. The petitioner is instructed to appear before the Assessing Officer on a specified date with all the evidence supporting the claim for input tax credit.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The present writ petition has been filed, impugning Ext.P1 assessment order and Ext.P2 recovery notice dated 20.08.2022 and 24.07.2023, respectively.
2. From the perusal of the Assessment Order impugned in the present writ petition, it appears that the 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. This Court, in Diya Agencies v. The State Tax Officer (Judgment dated 12.09.2023 in WPC 29769/2023), after taking note of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of The State of Karnataka v. M/s Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited (2023 (3) TMI 533 SC) as well as Calcutta High Court judgment in Sun craft Energy Private Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ballygunge Charge (Judgment dated 02.08.2023 in MAT No.1218/2023) has held that the input tax credit of the assessee under the GST regime cannot be denied merely on the difference of GSTR 2A and 3B.
3. Paragraph 8 of Diya Agencies (supra) of this Court 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 that the claim is bonafide and genuine, the petitioner should be given input tax credit. Merely on the ground that in Form GSTR-2A the said tax is not reflected should not be a sufficient ground to deny the assessee the claim of the input tax credit. The assessing authority is therefore, directed to give an opportunity to the petitioner to give evidence in respect of his claim for input tax credit. The petitioner is directed to appear before the assessing authority within fifteen days with all evidence in his possession to prove his claim for higher claim of input tax credit. After examination of the evidence placed by the petitioner/assessee, the assessing authority will pass a fresh order in accordance with law.”
4. In view thereof, the present writ petition is allowed. The matter is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Authority to examine the evidence of the petitioner irrespective of the Form GSTR 2A for petitioner’s claim of 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 Officer on 03.10.2023 at 11.00 a.m. with all the evidence in support of his claim for input tax credit.