9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... E MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH FOR THE PETITIONER : BY ADVS. SRI. AJI V. DEV SRI. ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV SRI. S. SAJEEVAN FOR THE RESPONDENT : BY ADV. SMT. JASMIN M. M. - GP JUDGMENT DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the CGST Act and Kerala SGST Act, 2017 and the Rules made thereunder. The petitioner filed returns under the provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , disallowance of the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner does not appear to be correct. The learned Counsel for the petitioner had placed reliance on the Judgment of the Karnataka High Court in M/s. Orient Traders v. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes & Another [2023 (1) TMI 838 - Karnataka HC], would submit that for bonafide mistake the dealer/assessee should not be punished and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cribes different time limit for moving such an application and, therefore, I do not find much substance in this writ petition. 4. So far as the Judgment of the Karnataka High Court (supra) relied on by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is concerned, in the said Judgment, the statutory provisions have not been taken. The said Judgment does not have any binding precedent. In view thereof, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
