M. Natarajan Vs Proper Officer /Commercial Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Summary: The Madras High Court considered a writ petition challenging the order dated 29.08.2024, insofar as Input Tax Credit (ITC) was rejected on the ground of belated filing of returns under Section 16(4) of the applicable GST enactments. The petitioner submitted that the law had subsequently been amended by insertion of Section 16(5), which re-fixed the time limits for filing returns and availing ITC. On this basis, the petitioner contended that the impugned order was no longer sustainable. The respondent’s learned Additional Government Pleader accepted notice on behalf of the respondent.
In view of the change in law through incorporation of Section 16(5), the Court held that the impugned order could not be sustained to the extent it rejected ITC on the ground of belated filing of returns. Accordingly, the Court partly set aside the impugned order insofar as such rejection of ITC was concerned. The writ petition was disposed of with the above observation, the connected miscellaneous petition was closed, and no costs were imposed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
An order dated 29.08.2024 is assailed partly only insofar as belated filing of returns under Section 16(4) of applicable GST enactments is concerned.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the law was amended by inserting Section 16(5) re-fixing the time limits for filing returns and availing of Input Tax Credit (ITC). On account of this development, he submits that the impugned order is not sustainable.
3. Ms. Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Additional Government Pleader (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
4. In view of the change in law by incorporation of Section 16(5), the impugned order is set aside partly insofar as rejection of ITC on the ground of belated filing of returns is concerned.
5. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
