Rajkumar Josphine Vs Superintendent (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that input tax credit [ITC] which is barred by limitation in terms of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [CGST Act], but, within the period prescribed in terms of Section 16(5) of the CGST Act cannot be denied.
Facts- This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner/taxpayer, who is registered dealer on the files of the respondent-Department under the provisions of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act)/ Central Goods and Services Tax Act ( CGST Act) as the case may be, challenging the orders passed by the respondent-Department, whereby, their claim of ITC was reversed/negatived and consequently, the petitioner was directed to pay tax/penalty/interest.
Conclusion- Held that the impugned order dated 27.02.2025 is quashed insofar as it relates to the claim made by the petitioner for ITC which is barred by limitation in terms of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, but, within the period prescribed in terms of Section 16(5) of the said Act. Therefore, the respondent-Department is restrained from initiating any proceedings against the petitioner by virtue of the impugned order based on the issue of limitation. In view of the fact that the impugned order is quashed, the respondent-Department is directed to take immediate steps towards de-freezure of the petitioner’s bank account by sending intimation to the concerned banker, if the petitioner’s bank account was freezed in furtherance of the impugned order.
