Input tax credit claims challenged over GSTR-2A vs GSTR-3B mismatch; denial set aside, evidence-based reassessment ordered.

Denial of input tax credit (ITC) solely on the basis of mismatch between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B was in issue. Relying on SC precedent and consistent HC authority, the Court held that ITC under the GST regime cannot be rejected merely because of a GSTR-2A/3B variance; the assessing authority must independently evaluate the assessee's supporting evidence for the ITC claim notwithstanding Form GSTR-2A. The impugned decision was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration and a reasoned order in accordance with law after examining the assessee's evidence.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the denial of input tax credit based on the difference between GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B in an assessment order, and the validity of such denial.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Denial of input tax credit based on GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B difference
The petitioner challenged the assessment order and recovery notice claiming input tax credit of Rs. 2,58,116/- with interest and penalty totaling approximately Rs. 4,58,156/-. The Court referred to the Supreme Court judgment in The State of Karnataka v. M/s Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited and a Calcutta High Court judgment, holding that denial of input tax credit solely based on the difference between GSTR 2A and GSTR 3B is not valid under the GST regime.

Issue 2: Remand for re-examination of input tax credit claim
Referring to the Diya Agencies v. The State Tax Officer judgment, the Court directed the matter to be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for re-examination of the petitioner's evidence for the input tax credit claim. The Assessing Officer was instructed to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to prove the genuineness of the claim, emphasizing that denial based on GSTR-2A alone is insufficient. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Assessing Authority with all evidence to support the claim for input tax credit by a specified date.

Conclusion:
The writ petition was allowed, and the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Authority for a fresh examination of the petitioner's evidence for the input tax credit claim, irrespective of the GSTR 2A. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Assessing Officer with all supporting evidence on a specified date for further proceedings in accordance with the law.

---