TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Petitioner Allowed ITC Claim Despite Missing Form DRC-05; Case Remanded for Fresh GST Liability Review</h1> <h3>M/s. Urban Gear Gifts LLP Versus Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Karnataka, Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes, Bengaluru.</h3> The HC held that the petitioner was entitled to claim ITC despite the non-consideration of Form DRC-05, as the transaction with the supplier was ... Entitlement to ITC - Non-consideration of Form DRC-05 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that there is a transaction between petitioner and M/s. Scope Amra Enterprises LLP. The said Scope Amra is supplying certain goods to the petitioner, for which the GST liability had to be discharged by Scope Amra. It is on account of the alleged mistake on the part of Scope Amra in not disclosing the transaction in GST-01 that the petitioner could not claim the benefit thereof. The petitioner could not place the documents as regards the orders passed in respect of Scope Amra at the time when the matter was taken for consideration by Respondent Nos.2 and 3. Now, a memo has been filed placing all those documents on record, it would be required for these documents to be examined by Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to ascertain, if the liability has been discharged by Scope Amra and the petitioner was entitled for the benefit claimed by the petitioner as held by the Coordinated Bench of this Court in the order dated 06.01.2023 in W.P. No. 16175/2022, the benefit of Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST has been extended even to subsequent years than that which has been provided in the said circular. The said benefit, needless to say, would also enure to the benefit of the petitioner. The matter is remitted to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for fresh consideration in terms of the observations made hereinabove by considering the orders passed with reference to M/s. Scope Amra Enterprises LLP, which could be placed by the petitioner on record before Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 - Petition allowed by way of remand. 1. ISSUES:1. Whether the adjudication orders passed under sections 73(10), 73(9), 50 & 122 of the KGST Act, 2017 and CGST Act, 2017 for the tax periods April 2019 to March 2020 can be quashed on the ground of nondisclosure of transactions by the supplier in GSTR-01 despite tax liability being discharged.2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST for the relevant tax period despite the supplier's omission in filing GSTR-01.3. Whether the matter requires remand for fresh consideration upon production of additional documents not previously placed before the adjudicating authority.2. RULINGS / HOLDINGS:1. The Court held that the adjudication orders dated 18-07-2024 and 22-08-2024 are liable to be set aside as the petitioner could not avail GST benefit solely due to the nondisclosure of transactions in GSTR-01 by the supplier, who had otherwise discharged the tax liability.2. The Court extended the benefit of Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST to the petitioner for the year 2019-2020, relying on a coordinate bench decision which held that such benefit may enure even to subsequent years beyond those specified in the circular.3. The Court ordered remand of the matter to the Respondents for fresh consideration upon production of relevant documents relating to the supplier's tax compliance, directing that these be examined to ascertain the petitioner's entitlement to the claimed benefit.3. RATIONALE:1. The Court applied the provisions of sections 73(10), 73(9), 50 & 122 of the KGST Act, 2017 and CGST Act, 2017, focusing on the interplay between supplier's tax compliance and recipient's entitlement to input tax credit.2. The Court relied on precedent from a coordinate bench which interpreted Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST as capable of being extended beyond its stated temporal scope to provide relief in cases of inadvertent supplier omission.3. The Court recognized the principle that fresh evidence or documents, which were not available or placed on record at the time of original adjudication, justify remand for reconsideration to ensure just adjudication.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
