Roshan Sharma Vs Deputy Commissioner of Revenue (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court in Roshan Sharma v. Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax & Anr. has agreed to examine whether Input Tax Credit (ITC) can be denied solely because a supplier’s GST registration was later cancelled with retrospective effect, even though it was valid on the date of the transaction. The petitioner, a registered dealer, faced tax, interest, and penalty demands after the Department rejected ITC based on retrospective cancellation and alleged documentary discrepancies, while also denying cross-examination and access to crucial evidence such as Fastag data. The High Court had refused relief, citing the availability of an alternative statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, without deciding the merits of ITC denial. The Supreme Court issued notice and stayed the High Court order, noting that the questions raised require examination, particularly whether ITC can be denied in such circumstances and whether procedural fairness was violated. The case raises significant issues regarding natural justice and retrospective consequences under GST law.
Read High Court Judgment in this case: Writ Appeal Rejected Because Effective Appellate Remedy Available Under GST Law
Facts:
Roshan Sharma (‘the Petitioner’), a registered dealer, purchased goods from a supplier, whose GST registration was cancelled retrospectively.
