Vinod George Vs State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court)
Summary: The Kerala High Court, in Vinod George Vs State Tax Officer, considered a challenge to Ext.P3 order passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, which denied the petitioner’s input tax credit for March 2019 because the relevant return had not been furnished within the statutory period prescribed under Section 16(4). The petitioner, a registered taxpayer under the CGST/KGST Act, relied on Section 16(5), contending that the return had been submitted before the cutoff date of 30 November 2021 specified in that provision. On examining Ext.P1 return, the Court found that it had been submitted on 2 January 2020 and therefore fell within the cutoff contemplated under Section 16(5) of the CGST Act. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner was entitled to relief against the denial based on the Section 16(4) time limit. It disposed of the writ petition by quashing Ext.P3 only to the extent that it declined input tax credit for March 2019 on that ground. The assessing authority was directed to reconsider the matter and grant the credit on the strength of Section 16(5), if the petitioner was otherwise entitled. The relief thus removed the stated time-limit objection while leaving other eligibility conditions for consideration by the assessing authority.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner is a registered taxpayer under the provisions of the CGST/KGST Act. The grievance of the petitioner is regarding the Ext.P3 order passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, by which the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner, pertaining to the period of March 2019, was declined on the ground that, the petitioner failed to furnish the returns within the statutory period contemplated under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act.
2. The challenge is raised by the petitioner mainly on the ground that, as per Section 16(5) of the Act, the petitioner is entitled to get the input tax credit, in view of the fact that, the petitioner had submitted the return before the cut-off date contemplated therein, which is 30.11.2021. On going through Ext.P1 return, it is seen that the petitioner had submitted the return on 02.01.2020, and thus, it is evident that the petitioner had submitted the returns within the cutoff date contemplated under Section 16(5) of the CGST Act. Therefore, in the light of the statutory provisions contemplated in Section 16(5), the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by quashing Ext.P3 to the extent it declines the input tax credit pertaining to the month of March 2019, on the ground that the petitioner failed to submit the returns within the period contemplated under Section 16(4) of the Act, with a direction to the assessing authority to reconsider the matter and to grant the input tax credit on the strength of Section 16(5), if the petitioner is otherwise entitled.
