Balaji Studio Vs Deputy Commissioner (Madras High Court)
Summary: The Madras High Court partly quashed an order dated 13.06.2024 challenged by Balaji Studio insofar as defect no.2 concerned denial of Input Tax Credit for belated filing of returns. The petitioner submitted that the returns had been filed within the extended time limit under Section 16(5) of the applicable GST enactments. Regarding defect no.1, the petitioner stated that the tax liability had been accepted and the tax, interest and penalty remitted. On examining the impugned order, the Court found that the recorded filing dates of the relevant GSTR 3B returns fell within the extended statutory time limit for the relevant assessment period.
Accordingly, it quashed the order only in respect of defect no.2. For defect no.1, the Court noted prima facie evidence that the entire demand had been discharged and left this aspect for verification by the respondents. The writ petition was disposed of, the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, and no costs were awarded.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
An order dated 13.06.2024 is partly assailed insofar as defect no.2 is concerned.
2. Adverting to the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was denied Input Tax Credit on the ground of belated filing of returns, whereas the returns were filed within the extended time limit under Section 16(5) of applicable GST enactments. As regards defect no.1, he submits that the tax liability was accepted and tax, interest and penalty were remitted.
3. Mr. B. Sivaraman, learned Government Advocate (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
4. On perusal of the impugned order, as regards defect no.2, the order records the dates of filing of the relevant GSTR 3B returns. Such dates fall within the extended time limit under Section 16(5) in respect of the relevant assessment period. Therefore, the impugned order is quashed insofar as defect no.2 is concerned. As regards defect no.1, there is prima facie evidence that the entire demand was discharged. This aspect may be verified by the respondents.
5. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
