Case Law Details
Rinshad Maliyam Karim Vs State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court)
In the case of Rinshad Maliyam Karim Vs State Tax Officer, the Kerala High Court addressed a GST dispute where the petitioner, a registered dealer, faced a liability due to discrepancies between the GSTR-1 filed by the supplier and the GSTR-3B filed by the petitioner. This mismatch resulted in the denial of certain input tax credits (ITC) to which the petitioner was entitled, leading to additional liabilities, interest, and penalties. The petitioner had filed an application under Section 161 of the CGST/SGST Act for rectification of the assessment order. The Kerala High Court, without delving into the merits of the case, directed the competent authority to review the rectification application (Ext.P9) and pass a decision in accordance with the law. The court mandated that the petitioner be given an opportunity to be heard and that a decision be made within three months from the receipt of the judgment’s certified copy.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner is a registered dealer under the CGST/SGST Act. According to the petitioner owing to mismatch between GSTR-I filed by the supplier and GSTR-3B filed by the petitioner certain input tax credit to which the petitioner was entitled has not been granted to him, as a result of which huge liability has been imposed on the petitioner together with interest and penalty. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P9 application under Section 161 of the CGST/SGST Act for rectification of the order.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondent to consider Ext.P9 in accordance with the law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
3. The learned Senior Government Pleader submits that the respondent can be directed to take a decision on Ext.P9 in accordance with the law.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader and having regard to the limited nature of the reliefs now sought for by the petitioner, without going into the merits, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9 rectification application filed by the petitioner in accordance with the law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
Author Bio
