Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (3) TMI 1168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Techno Rubber Plastic and Co., Techno Rubber and Plastic and M/s.Unique Autoplastics Private Limited had uploaded their invoices in GSTR -1, but no tax had been remitted by them, since GSTR 3B had not filed by them. The petitioner, as a consequence, suffered reversal of ITC, IGST, CGST and SGST. In the present case, the petitioner has chosen to seek rectification of order-in-original dated 29.07.2022 based upon the aforsaid decisions. The Court has no intention of intervening in the conclusion of the assessing authority on this aspect. However, the procedure followed by the authority is clearly contrary to the third proviso to Section 16 of the Act that necessitates that, where the authority proposes to take a view adverse to the applic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s have been cancelled and the tax paid by the petitioner has not been remitted by them to the Department. 4. Section 16 deals with the eligibility and conditions for taking Input Tax Credit (ITC). Sub-section (2) of Section 16 sets out certain mandatory contingencies for continuity of ITC to a registered person. Inter alia, one of the conditions is that the tax charged in respect of such supply has been actually paid to the Government in cash or through utilisation of ITC, admissible in respect of the said supply. 5. Thus, and undoubtedly, there is a mandate cast upon the petitioner/claimant to ITC to ensure compliance with the provisions as, in the alternative and as a natural consequence of Section 16(2)(c), he would be entitled to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... CCE V. M/s.Juhi Alloys Limited (Excise Appeal No. 3625 3627 of 2010-Ex (SM), CESTAT, Delhi, dated 01.07.2013) iv) Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar V. M/s.Kay Kay Industries (AIT-2013-147-SC) 9. There can be no dispute on the position that the provisions of Section 16 are to be observed strictly, such that, there is no jeopardy to the interests of the revenue. The provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 has, assimilating wisdom of experience from the erstwhile tax regimes, gone one step further to ensure that the interests of the revenue are protected by providing for a mandate that the tax liability is defrayed/met either at the hands of the supplier or the purchaser, the petitioner in this case. Thus, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates