Case Law Details
Myres Tyre Supply (India) Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
In addition to writ with High Court appellant had also moved an application for refund of the Input Tax Credit (ITC) claimed under the TNVAT Act and this application was without prejudice to their rights under section 140(3) of the TNGST Act. The appellant had also challenged the various provisions of the CGST and Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Acts in this regard with regard to the time limit of 90 days in processing the applications for the credit of the Input Tax Credit.
In view of the fact that the writ petitions have been withdrawn, we direct the respondents to consider the application submitted by the appellant for refund of the Input Tax Credit under the provisions of the TNVAT Act, independently and on its own merits.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
The instant appeal is a challenge to an order dated 12.11.2018 in W.P.(MD)Nos.19464 & 19465 of 2018. The prayer in the writ petition is for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Assistant Commissioner (Sales Tax), West Veli Street Assessment Circle, Madurai, to grant refund on the accrued Input Tax Credit under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, [hereinafter referred to as ‘TNVAT Act’], amounting to Rs.30,44,254/- under Section 142(3) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as ‘TNGST Act’] read with Section 19(18) of the TNVAT Act.
2. The material on record discloses that the appellant had also moved an application dated 28.06.2018 for refund of the Input Tax Credit claimed under the TNVAT Act and this application was without prejudice to their rights under Section 140(3) of the TNGST Act. The appellant had also challenged the various provisions of the CGST and TNGST Acts in this regard in W.P.(MD)Nos.18723 & 18724 of 2018, with regard to the time limit of 90 days in processing the applications for the credit of the Input Tax Credit. Pending the two writ petitions, the learned Single Judge, dismissed the instant writ petitions as being per-mature, by observing that it was open to the appellant to make appropriate modifications in the prayer in the pending writ petitions ie.,W.P.(MD)Nos. 18723 & 18724 of 2018, challenging the Rules of the CGST and TNGST to take care of the relief as prayed for in the writ petitions.
3. Today, the learned Counsel for the appellant has withdrawn the writ petitions being W.P.(MD)Nos.18723 & 18724 of 2018. In view of the fact that the writ petitions have been withdrawn, we direct the respondents to consider the application dated 28.06.2018, submitted by the appellant for refund of the Input Tax Credit under the provisions of the TNVAT Act, independently and on its own merits. The respondents are directed to consider the same within a period of twelve [12] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4. Resultantly, the judgment impugned in this appeal dated 12.11.2018, is set aside, in the above mentioned terms. The fact that the appellant has withdrawn the two writ petitions was always without prejudice to their consideration of the applications dehors the challenge to the provisions of the CGST and TNGST Acts, regarding the time limits for claiming Input Tax Credit and their right to claim refund of the Input Tax Credit.
5. The Writ Appeal is accordingly, allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
