Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Lloyd Insulations India Limited Vs State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court)
Appeal Number : Wp(C) No 40443 Of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 15/11/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Lloyd Insulations India Limited Vs State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court)

Lloyd Insulations India Limited approached the Kerala High Court challenging the denial of input tax credit (ITC) for the financial year 2019-20, as per the provisions of Sub-Section (4) of Section 16 of the CGST/SGST Acts, through an order dated 23.08.2024. The petitioner argued that with the notification of Sub-Section (5) of Section 16, they should be entitled to the ITC that was previously denied. After hearing the petitioner’s counsel and the Government Pleader, the court decided to set aside the order that denied the ITC, acknowledging the relevance of the newly notified Sub-Section (5). The court directed the competent authority to issue a fresh order considering the provisions of Section 16(5), after giving the petitioner a chance to be heard. This process must be completed within three months from the receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT

Petitioner has approached this Court, being aggrieved by the fact that petitioner has been denied the benefit of input tax credit on account of the provisions contained in Sub Section (4) of Section 16 of the CGST/SGST Acts, for the financial year 2019-20, through Ext.P3 order dated 23.08.2024.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, with the notification of Sub-Section (5) of Section 16 of the CGST/SGST Acts, the petitioner would now be entitled to the benefit of input tax credit which has been denied to the petitioner through Ext.P3 order.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and having regard to the assertion of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that on account of notification of Sub-Section (5) of Section 16 of the CGST/SGST Acts, the petitioner will be entitled to input tax credit, which has been denied to the petitioner by Ext. P3 order, the writ petition will stand disposed of, setting aside Ext.P3 to the extent that it denied input tax credit to the petitioner on account of the provisions of Sub Section (4) of Section 16 of the CGST/SGST Acts and directing the competent authority to pass fresh orders, after taking note of the provisions contained in Section 16(5) of the CGST/SGST Acts and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment .

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
February 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728