Case Law Details
Deepam Palm Dish Vs State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court)
The Kerala High Court quashed an order passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act that denied Input Tax Credit (ITC) for April 2018 and March 2019 on the ground that the returns were not filed within the time limit prescribed under Section 16(4). The petitioner contended that it was entitled to ITC under Section 16(5) of the CGST Act because the relevant returns had been filed before the cut-off date of 30.11.2021 prescribed under that provision.
The Court observed that the impugned order itself recorded that the returns for April 2018 and March 2019 had been filed on 15.02.2021 and 27.02.2021, respectively, which were within the time limit specified in Section 16(5). It held that Section 16(5) contains a non-obstante clause overriding Section 16(4), and therefore, once the returns were filed within the cut-off date under Section 16(5), the limitation prescribed under Section 16(4) ceased to apply. Accordingly, the Court quashed the order and directed the tax authority to reconsider the matter and grant the benefit of Section 16(5), if otherwise eligible.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
The petitioner is a registered tax payer under the provisions of the CGST and SGST Act. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner challenging Ext.P4 order passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act by which the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner pertaining to the months of April, 2018 and March, 2019 was declined on the reason that the petitioner failed to submit the returns within the period stipulated in Section 16(4) of the CGST Act.
2. The case of the petitioner is that, it is entitled to get the benefit of input tax credit in the light of Section 16(5) of the CGST Act, as the petitioner had already submitted the return before the cut off date under the said provision, which is 30.11.2021.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I find that there is some force in the said submission. This is particularly because, in the order impugned in this case itself, it is clearly mentioned that the returns for the months of April, 2018 and March, 2019 were submitted by the petitioner on 15.02.2021 and 27.02.2021 respectively. Thus, it is evident that the returns were submitted within the cut off date contemplated under Section 16(5) of the Act and hence the petitioner is entitled to the benefit. This is particularly because, Section 16(5) there is a non-obstante clause, as regards Section 16(4) and therefore, once the tax payer submits the return within the cut off date contemplated under Section 16(5) of the Act, the time line in Section 16(4) loses its significance.
In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of quashing Ext.P4 with a direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider the matter and grant the benefits of Section 16(5) of the CGST Act, if it is otherwise entitled.
Author Bio
