Maya Vinod Vs Assistant State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court)
Summary: The Kerala High Court, in Maya Vinod Vs Assistant State Tax Officer, WP(C) No. 33728 of 2026, decided on 1 October 2026, considered whether input tax credit (ITC) relating to financial year 2018-19 could be denied solely because the taxpayer had not filed the relevant monthly returns within the original limitation prescribed under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, despite satisfying the subsequently introduced relief under Section 16(5). The Court quashed the impugned assessment order and directed reconsideration of the ITC claim in accordance with Section 16(5), subject to the taxpayer’s other statutory eligibility requirements.
The petitioner was a registered taxpayer under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The assessing authority had passed an order under Section 73 of the CGST Act disallowing ITC for the tax period from 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019. The disallowance was based on the taxpayer’s failure to file the returns for February and March 2019 within the original statutory deadline under Section 16(4).
The petitioner relied upon Section 16(5), which provides retrospective relief for specified earlier financial years where the relevant return was furnished on or before 30 November 2021. The Court examined the GST return-status records produced as Exhibit P3 and found that the petitioner had filed the returns for February 2019 on 13 November 2019 and March 2019 on 27 November 2019. Both filing dates were before the statutory cut-off under Section 16(5). Accordingly, the Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of that provision.
The High Court quashed Exhibit P2, the order dated 23 April 2024, and directed the assessing authority to reconsider the matter and grant the benefit of ITC previously denied for non-compliance with Section 16(4), on the strength of Section 16(5), if the petitioner was otherwise eligible. The judgment thus addresses the time-limit ground of denial; it does not dispense with other conditions for claiming ITC.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner, is a registered taxpayer under the provisions of the CGST (Central Goods and Services Act, 2017) (for short ‘CGST Act’)/KSGST (Kerala State Goods and Services Act, 2017) (for short “KSGST Act’) Act. The challenge raised by the petitioner is against Ext.P2 Order passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, by which, the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner, pertaining to the tax period from 01.04.2018 to 31.03.2019 has been declined on the reason that, the petitioner, failed to submit the monthly returns for the months of February and March 2019 within the statutory period contemplated under Section 16(4) of the Act. The challenge is raised by the petitioner mainly on the ground that, in the light of Section 16(5) of the CGST Act, the petitioner is entitled to get the input tax credit, as she submitted the returns, within the time limit contemplated under Section 16(5) of the CGST Act. As per the said provision, in case the taxpayer is furnishing the return on or before 30.11.2021, such taxpayer would be entitled to claim the input tax credit. In this case, it is discernible from Ext.P3 that the petitioner furnished the returns for the months of February and March 2019 on 13.11.2019 and 27.11.2019 respectively and thus the same are filed within the cut-off date contemplated under Section 16(5). Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of quashing Ext.P2, with a direction to the assessing authority to reconsider the matter and to grant the benefit of input tax credit to the petitioner, which was denied in Ext.P2 for non-compliance of Section 16(4), on the strength of Section 16(5) of the CGST Act, if the petitioner is otherwise entitled.
