9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner was served with an Audit Note for audit of the financial years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 under TNGST Act. Subsequently, audit was transferred to Tirunelveli Circle and a revised audit notice in Form ADT-01 dated 04.10.2021 was issued to the petitioner by the Assistant Commissioner RAL, Tirunelveli Circle. Pursuant thereto, the audit team visited the petitioner's premises on various dates, namely, 20.01.2022, 21.01.2022, 24.01.2022, 28.01.2022, 01.02.2022 and 03.02.2022 respectively. On completion of audit on 03.02.2022, an audit summary report in A.R.No.1/2022 was issued to the petitioner. 3. It is submitted that the audit report pointed out several defects, in all 38 defects, relating to the assessment year 2018-2019. A detailed reply was filed by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, Tirunelveli Circle in response to the audit summary report, while also requesting further time. The petitioner's request was rejected and final audit report in Form ADT-02 dated 22.02.2022 was issued to the petitioner confirming all the 38 defects mentioned in the audit summary report. In the impugned order, reference was made to DRC-01A notice dated 11.03.2022 relati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /-. The abstract for credit amount received in 2018-2019 was enclosed as evidence. It was thus submitted that there is no difference in ITC. The relevant portion of the objection filed by the petitioner is extracted hereunder: ''The department has raised the point of discrepancy of ITC of Rs. 59879346/- in taking the credit received in 2017-2018 but availed in 2018-2019 as detailed here under. 1. The ITC availed in 2018-2019 is Rs. 473779540.00 2. Less ITC booked in 2018-19 But availed in 2019-20 (-) Rs. 102296461.00 Rs. 463483079.00 3. Add the ITC received in 2017-18 But availed in 2018-19 (+)Rs. 59879346.00 Rs. 523362425.00 Hence the ITC as per Audited Financial Statements as per Audited Financial Statements or book of accounts of Rs. 523362425.00 has been availed only be adding in the credit of Rs. 59879346.00 from the ITC received in 2017-18 but availed in 2018-19. Copies of GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C are enclosed for verification. "Table -12-B of GSTR-9C for the FY 2018-19 Description Input Tax Credit (Rs) A. ITC availed as per audited Annual Financial Statement for the State/UT (For mu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... portion is extracted hereunder: "The department has raised the point that the tax payer has availed excess credit of CGST Rs. 17751938/- SGST Rs. 17751938/- & IGST Rs. 11364129/- in GSTR-3B than the credit reflecting/available in GSTR-2A as per Table 8A of GSTR-9. We have availed the credit as per the ITC register maintained based on the Tax invoices availing ITC as per the provisions of section 16 of CGST/TNGST Act 2017. On verification of accounts it is ascertained that the ITC taken as per the Books and records are as under after deducting the ITC on import of goods, ITC of tax paid under RCM, and ITC of 2017-18 taken in 2018-19. Particulars of ITC IGST CGST SGST Total ITC as per Books 18-19 205994959.15 137381712.94 137381712.94 Less import 92117352.50 - - Less RCM - 3243404.53 3243404.53 Less ITC of 17-18 taken in 18-19 13270595.39 9839217.47 9839217.47 Net ITC for 18-19 100607011.26 124299090.94 124299090.94 Table 8A of GSTR-9 104601290.00 120052059.00 120052059.00 Difference -3994278.74 4247031.94 4247031.94 From the above it can be seen the difference amount of ITC is not as raised by the department available 16 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ictional High Court judgment binding on the CGST Officers. We also rely on the Honorable Jurisdictional High Court of Madras in the case of Inko Chemical India Pvt Ltd. Vs Commercial Tax Officer reported in 2018(15) GSTL 523 (Mad) where it has been held that non-disclosure of particulars in monthly return by selling dealer cannot be cause to seek tax or reversal of ITC from purchasing dealer. We also rely on the case of Honorable Kerala High Court Judgment in the case of St. Joseph Tea Co. Ltd. vs State Tax Officer 2021 (52) GSTL 395 (Ker) and the Honorable Supreme Court Judgment in the case of Union of India Vs Bharati Airtel Ltd. 2021(54) GSTL257 (SC). In this judgment the Honorable Supreme Court has held that GST is a self-assessment tax system based on document and that GSTR-2A is only for the purpose of facilitation to the tax payer and not the sole document based upon which ITC can be claimed. It is only the documents, records and conditions prescribed in the CGST Act 2017 based upon which, the ITC can be clalmed. Therefore the Supreme Court has clarified that the ITC cannot be made dependent upon the GSTR-2A or GSTR-2B. These judgments are binding on the Departments to maint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
