Thirupathi Powerloom Weavers Coop and Society Limited Vs Superintendent of GST and Central Excise (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that Input Tax Credit (ITC) barred by limitation in terms of section 16(4) of the CGST Act but within period prescribed in terms of section 16(5) of CGST Act is eligible. Accordingly, order quashing ITC set aside.
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/negative and consequently, the petitioners have been directed to pay tax/penalty/interest.
Conclusion- Held that the impugned order dated 11.01.2023 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 petitioners 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 de-freezure of the concerned petitioner bank account, if any, which have been freezed in furtherance of the impugned order, by sending intimation to the concerned bankers.
