Sudhan VFX Vs Superintendent (Madras High Court)
In Sudhan VFX Vs Superintendent (Madras High Court), the petitioner challenged a GST recovery notice demanding Rs. 39,60,000 for IGST for services allegedly supplied between 4th and 5th July 2023. The petitioner argued that invoices were raised but the contract was not executed, no payment was received, and therefore no tax liability arose. While the transactions were recorded in GSTR-1, they were omitted in GSTR-3B. The Department issued Form GST DRC-01B, which the petitioner replied to, claiming cancellation of the invoices and non-receipt of payment. The court noted that the reply was incomplete and emphasized that tax liability arises even if payment was not received. The petitioner was required to substantiate claims with annual books of account, as unilateral invoice cancellation is insufficient. The Court disposed of the writ by remitting the matter back to the Respondent to pass a fresh order within 30 days, directing the petitioner to provide proper evidence, failing which the petition would stand dismissed. No costs were awarded.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Mr. Sai Srujan Tayi, learned Senior Standing Counsel takes notice for the Respondent.
2. This Writ Petition is being disposed of at the time of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Respondent.
