2022 (7) TMI 650

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....filed for the year 2015-2016. Thus, and since there was nil output to tax liability, available Input Tax Credit (in short 'ITC') was claimed in terms of Section 18(3) of the Act read with Rule 11(2) of the VAT Rules, 2007, as a refund, in prescribed form, being Form-W. 3.Form-W has been filed, admittedly, belatedly, and beyond the period of 180 days as provided for under the Rules. The form ought to have been filed within the period of 180 days from the date of exports as per Section 18 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, but has been filed on 25.02.2016 with a delay of less than a month. However, the delay as aforesaid, is not fatal to the claim of refund, and for this purpose, one need only refer to the oftquoted decision of this Court in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the provisions of Section 19(11) of the TNVAT Act was challenged. Section 19(11) states as follows: "Section 19 - Input Tax Credit - (11) In case any registered dealer fails to claim input tax credit in respect of any transaction of taxable purchase in any month, he shall make the claim before the end of the financial year or before ninety days from the date of purchase, whichever is later." 7. In the context of the provision as above, the Hon'ble Court held that the timeline for claim of ITC was mandatory and sacrosanct and there was no indication in the Statute for extension of time. It was thus mandatory and a pre-condition for consideration of the claim for utilisation of ITC. 8. They also noticed the earlier....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te. In the event the timeline had been missed, a further extension of time was granted under Section 19(11). An assessee who misses even the extended timeline had indeed missed the benefit of ITC availment and the returns of the assessee as filed, would be taken to be final. 12. In my considered view, the ratio of the aforesaid two judgements would not be applicable in this case. We are not concerned in this case with a claim for utilisation of ITC for adjustment as against output tax liability, but a refund of accumulated ITC. The entitlement of the petitioner to ITC is undisputed. The fact that the petitioner has claimed the benefit of Section 16 relating to zero rated sales is also undisputed. 13.In such circumstances, the strict a....