2025 (1) TMI 208 - HC - GST

Taxpayer Granted Opportunity to Rectify Late-Filed ITC Return Through Departmental Procedures Under Recent Legislative Amendment

M/s. Amarnath Enterprises Versus Assistant Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Sambalpur and others

In the HC case concerning an ITC claim, the petitioner sought relief for a late-filed return. Despite a subsequent legislative amendment extending the ... Entitlement to Input Tax Credit (ITC) - extension of time for filing return till 30th November, 2021 - HELD THAT:- Petitioner has moved Court invoking writ jurisdiction on not having filed appeal. In the circumstances, circular dated 15th October, 2024 issued by Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST policy wing requiring petitioner to apply for rectification is to be complied with. This observation is on noticing that the circular was issued after the writ petition was presented. Considering departmental procedure is now in place for petitioner to comply with in having impugned order rectified and time for making the application is still available to petitioner, the writ petition is disposed off accordingly. In the case before the Orissa High Court, the petitioner, represented by Mr. S. Ray, sought relief regarding an Input Tax Credit (ITC) claim of approximately Rs. 97,00,000/-. The petitioner filed the return ten days late, relying on an amendment to section 16 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, as per the Finance Act, 2024, which extended the filing deadline to 30th November, 2021. However, this amendment was not considered by the adjudicating authority because it had not been notified at the time of the impugned order dated 28th August, 2024. The amendment was subsequently notified on 27th September, 2024.Mr. A. Kedia, representing the revenue, referenced a circular dated 15th October, 2024, from the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, which stated that if no appeal is preferred, the assessee must apply for rectification under section 148 within six months from the notification date.The court noted that the petitioner had not filed an appeal and had instead invoked writ jurisdiction. Given the issuance of the circular after the writ petition and the availability of departmental procedures for rectification, the court directed the petitioner to comply with the circular's requirements. The writ petition was disposed of, allowing the petitioner to seek rectification within the available time frame.