Wins Auto Sales Vs Union of India (Kerala High Court)
The Kerala High Court, in M/s Wins Auto Sales Vs Union of India, examined a challenge to an assessment order concerning the financial year 2017-18. The assessing authority had rejected the petitioner’s input tax credit claim on the ground that the credit had been incorrectly adjusted against CGST and SGST instead of IGST. The petitioner challenged the assessment, contending that the issue was already covered by the Division Bench judgment in Rejimon Padickaparambil Alex v. Union of India & Others, reported as 2024 KHC Online 7215.
The petitioner submitted that the rejection of input tax credit solely on account of its adjustment under different GST heads was contrary to the principles established in the earlier decision. The High Court examined the records and the findings of the Division Bench. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. concluded that the petitioner’s grievance was covered in its favour by the precedent and that judicial interference with the assessment order was warranted.
Accordingly, the High Court quashed Ext.P6 assessment order and directed the fifth respondent, the State Tax Officer, to pass fresh orders after considering the principles laid down in Rejimon Padickaparambil Alex. The Court required the assessing authority to provide the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and complete the fresh adjudication within three months from receipt of the judgment. The Court also clarified that the State could approach the GST Council with a representation seeking directions to resolve the issue of adjustment of amounts between different GST tax heads, as contemplated in the earlier Division Bench decision.
Cases Discussed
Rejimon Padickaparambil Alex v. Union of India & Others, 2024 KHC Online 7215 (Kerala High Court) — The Division Bench ruling was followed in deciding the dispute concerning adjustment of input tax credit under different GST heads.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P6 order of assessment, pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. As per the said assessment order, the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner was rejected on the ground that the petitioner wrongly adjusted the input tax credit tax against CGST and SGST instead of IGST. The specific contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the issue raised by the petitioner is covered in favour of the petitioner as per the observations and findings made by the Division Bench of this Court in Rejimon Padickaparambil Alex v. Union of India & Ors. [2024 KHC Online 7215].
2. After carefully going through the records and examining the observations made by a Division Bench of this Court in the decision referred to above, I find that the issue raised by the petitioner is indeed covered in his favour. In such circumstances, interference is required.
3. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, quashing Ext.P6 order of assessment with a direction to the 5th respondent to pass fresh orders, in the light of the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in Rejimon Padickaparambil Alex case (supra). Appropriate orders in this regard shall be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after hearing the petitioner.
It is further made clear that, as observed in the operative portion of the decision in Rejimon Padickaparambil Alex (supra) case, it shall be open to the State to approach the GST Council along with a representation for issuing necessary directions to resolve the issue of adjustments of the amounts, in the light of the observations made by this Court in Rejimon Padickaparambil Alex case (supra).
