A2Z Infra Engineering LTD. Vs Union of India (Sikkim High Court)
During the proceedings, respondent nos. 1 to 6 filed an affidavit dated 25 March 2025 placing Notification No. 17/2024-Central Tax dated 27 September 2024 and Circular No. 237/31/2024-GST dated 15 October 2024 on record. The notification brought specified provisions of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 into force, including Section 118, which introduced subsections (5) and (6) into Section 16 of the CGST Act with retrospective effect from 1 July 2017. The circular clarified the retrospective relaxation of the time limit for availing ITC under Section 16(4) in specified circumstances. The Deputy Solicitor General of India, representing respondent nos. 1 to 6, expressly submitted that, in view of these developments, the petitioner was entitled to the ITC previously denied under the impugned order.
Taking note of the categorical stand adopted by the respondents, the High Court held that the writ petition deserved to be allowed. It accordingly quashed the order dated 21 March 2024. The decision turned on the respondents’ acknowledgment that the retrospective statutory amendment and subsequent clarification entitled the petitioner to the disputed ITC. The supplied order does not identify the petitioner, the court, the case number or the date of the final judgment, and it does not discuss any judicial precedents.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF SIKKIM HIGH COURT
The present writ petition seeks various directions upon the respondents. Essentially the petitioner is aggrieved bythe impugned Order dated 21.03.2024 by which the respondents have raised demands upon the petitioner as detailed therein. These demands were raised on the ground that as per Section 16(4) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (the CGST Act, 2017) last date for availing ITC for the Financial Year 2018-19 was 30.11.2019 and for the Financial Year 2019-20 was 30.11.2020. But the petitioner filed their GSTR 3B return for the corresponding months and accordingly availed ITC to the tune of Rs.2,95,58,264/- for the Financial Year 2018-19 and ITC to the tune of Rs.3,14,75,010 for the Financial Year 2019-2020 after the cut-off dates. Therefore, the respondents, in their considered view, raised the demand for irregularly availing ITC as indicated above.
2. The respondent nos.1 to 6 have now placed an affidavit on record dated 25.03.2025 bringing on record a Notification bearing No.17/2024-Central Tax dated 27.09.2024 and Circular No.237/31/2024-GST dated 15.10.2024. It is seen that by the Notification No.17/2024-Central Tax dated 27.09.2024, 27.09.2024 is the relevant date on which the provisions of Sections 118, 142, 148 and 150 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 (15 of 24) shall come into force.
3. Circular dated 15.10.2024 clarifies that sub-section (5) and sub-section (6) of Section 16 of the CGST Act, 2017 inserted under Section 16 of the CGST Act, 2017, with effect from the 1st day of July, 2017, vide Section 118 of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 the time limit to avail input tax credit under provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 16 of the CGST Act, 2017 has been retrospectively extended in certain specified cases.
4. The learned Deputy Solicitor General of India representing respondent nos. 1 to 6 submits that in view of the notification and the circular above, the petitioner is now entitled to the Input Tax Credit that was denied to them by the impugned order.
5. In view of the categorical stand taken by the respondents, the writ petition is liable to be allowed and the impugned order quashed. It is accordingly so ordered.
Publication verification: The supplied extract does not identify the court, parties, case number or judgment date. These details have therefore not been invented. The current canonical Google Doc was accessible, but the corresponding Google Sheet rules were not independently verified for this response.
