V.Janarthanan Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Facts- Madras High Court directs petitioner to produce necessary documents proving that work contract has been completed prior to notification no. 03/2022- Central Tax (Rate) dated 13.07.2022 changing the rate of tax from 12% to 18%. Accordingly, writ disposed of.
Vide the present writ petition, it is mainly contested that as far as the short payment of the tax at 12% instead of 18% as per the Notification No.03/2022-Central Tax (Rate), dated 13.07.2022 is concerned, it was submitted that the petitioner had completed the work way back in 2020 and that to regularise the records, invoice was raised on 30.07.2022 for the work that was completed earlier. Therefore, the respondent was not justified in imposing 18% tax, that is 6% differential tax on the petitioner.
Conclusion- Held that the Court is inclined to quash the impugned order insofar as the defect No.5 is concerned. Accordingly, the impugned order stands quashed to that extent with a direction to the respondent to re-do the exercise. The petitioner shall however produce necessary documents to substantiate that the petitioner had indeed completed the work during the period prior to the issuance of the aforesaid Notification changing the rate of tax from 12% to 18%. In case the petitioner fails to file requisite documents to substantiate the case, the respondent is at liberty to re-confirm the demand against the petitioner. Insofar as the imposition of penalty under Section 74 of the respective GST enactments is concerned, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same after the final orders are passed.
