TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 331
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... V. Menon, Smt. Meera V. Menon For the Respondent : Adv. Mr. P. R. Ajith Kumar, CGC, Sri. P. R. Sreejith, SC, Central Board of Excise And Customs, Sri. Mohammed Rafiq, Sr. Government Pleader JUDGMENT VINOD CHANDRAN, J. The controversy in the Writ Appeals and the Writ Petitions arose on the Goods and Services Tax regime coming into effect from 01.07.2017. The dealers who were covered under the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te Goods and Services Tax Authorities by orders, which were impugned in W.P.(C). Nos.18014/2019 and 18032/2019. The impugned orders in the writ petitions, now before us, found that the dealer had uploaded the Form and claimed input of excise duties paid for the stock held, purchased directly from the manufacturers and hence they do not come under the ambit of the Circular. 3. The assessees herein....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der the aforesaid Circular. Now the assessees realise their folly in having not included the Value Added Tax component for which they have a valid claim for input tax, along with FORM GST TRAN 1, which showed their Excise Duty component for the purpose of input tax credit. 4. The situation now faced by the assessees, is insofar as their earlier Writ Petitions itself filed on a wrong premise, whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt is with reference to the details having been uploaded in a wrong column. 6. We are of the opinion that the issue has to be considered first by the learned Single Judge. Considering the stalemate now occasioned by reason of the earlier Writ Petitions numbered as W.P.(C). 9081/2018 and W.P.(C). 9067/2018, the learned Counsel seeks for withdrawing these writ petitions, without prejudice to their ....