2025 (6) TMI 2029 - HC - GST

Entitlement to the benefit of input tax credit notwithstanding the petitioner having not filed the return u/s 39 of the WBGST/CGST Act 2017 within the time prescribed in the said Act - HELD THAT - Although the Covid-19 period was prevailing during the relevant point of time i.e. during 2020-21 and though the Hon ble Supreme Court in the suo motu writ petition IN RE COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION 2022 (1) TMI 385 - SC ORDER had extended the period of limitation inter alia for filing of appeals/proceedings including suits vide order dated 10th January 2022 however having regard to the fact that Section 16(5) had been inserted subsequently it is obvious that the legislature being conscious of the above situation had chosen not to extend the period for filing returns under Section 39 of the said Act for the year 2020-21 beyond 30th November 2021. The constitutional validity of the aforesaid Section is not under challenge. Having regard thereto it is unable to accede to the contention of the petitioner. Petition dismissed.

Summary

The Calcutta High Court considered whether the petitioner was entitled to input tax credit despite filing the GSTR-3B return for October 2020 beyond the prescribed deadline under Section 39 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner filed the return on 19th February 2022, after the due date of 30th November 2021 as mandated by Section 16(4). The Court noted the subsequent insertion of Section 16(5) by The Finance (No.2) Act, 2024, which extended the filing period up to 30th November 2021 for the 2020-21 period but did not extend it beyond that date.The petitioner argued for a further extension to 30th November 2022, citing the Covid-19 pandemic and the Supreme Court's suo motu order (C) 3 of 2020 dated 10th January 2022, which extended limitation periods. The Court rejected this, holding that the legislature, aware of the pandemic, deliberately chose not to extend the filing deadline beyond 30th November 2021. The constitutional validity of Section 16(5) was not challenged.Accordingly, the Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to input tax credit due to late filing and dismissed the writ petition, stating: "I am unable to accede to the contention of the petitioner." No costs were awarded.