Claiming of ITC Under Wrong Head Is Only a Technical Mistake Committed by Assessee | HC
- Blog|News|GST & Customs|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 13 December, 2024
Latest from Taxmann
Case Details: Rejimon Padickapparambil Alex v. Union of India - [2024] 169 taxmann.com 152 (Kerala)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Dr. A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar & K.V. Jayakumar, JJ.
-
R. Jaikrishna, Anish P., C.S. Arun Shankar, Ganesan M., Smt. Narayani Harikrishnan & Vivek Bhat D., Advs. for the Petitioner.
-
P.R. Sreejith, Adv., Govt. Pleader, Smt. Resmitha Ramachandran & T.C. Krishna, Sr. Panel Counsel for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The assessee was a registered dealer and received various inwards supplies of goods, both inter-state and intra-state. For the inter-state inward supplies, on which IGST was paid by the supplier, the assessee had to avail input tax credit. While filing Form GSTR-3B, instead of showing the IGST component in the eligible credit details, the assessee inadvertently showed the IGST component as nil and added the bifurcated CGST and SGST components of IGST to the existing figures showing eligible CGST and SGST credit.
This resulted in a mismatch between Form GSTR-2A and Form GSTR-3B. The Assessing Authority (AA) contended that the mismatch had resulted in the assessee utilising ‘unavailable credit’ towards payment of CGST and SGST on outward supplies. Further, the authority issued a notice demanding the return of the CGST/SGST amounts allegedly utilised in excess by the assessee.
High Court Held
The Kerala High Court held that Section 73 of the GST Act was attracted only when it appeared to a proper officer that any tax had not been paid or short paid or erroneously refunded, or where input tax had been wrongly availed or utilised for any reason. In the instant case, there had been no wrong availment of credit, and the only mistake committed by the assessee was an inadvertent and technical one. The mistake was also insignificant because there was no outward supply attracting IGST that was effected by him. Therefore, the Court set aside the order of AA and allowed the writ petition by quashing the demand order.
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.
Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied
Sign Up
To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com
Latest Books
Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India
To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com
CA | CS | CMA
