TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 1157
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petition has been filed challenging the order dated 01.06.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade - 2 (Appeals - 1st), Muzaffarnagar by which the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant proceedings under section 74 of the GST Act have wrongly been initiated against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is a registered proprietorship firm and engaged in the business of purchase and sale of iron machinery parts and hardware. In its normal course of business, the petitioner made purchase during the period 2018-19 from one M/s Krishna Trading Company, Mathura and due tax invoice, payments, etc. were made through banking channel and thereafter, Input....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....& Fung India Private Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Another [Writ Petition No. 11596/2016, decided on 08.03.2017], iM/s CJ Darcl Logistic Limited Vs. Union of India & Others [Writ Petition (T) No. 215/2022], M/s Arhaan Ferrous & Non-Ferrous Solutions Private Limited Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner & Others [Writ Petition No. 24411/2023, decided on 03.08.2023], M/s D.Y. Beathel Enterprises Vs. State Tax Officer [Writ Petition (MD) No. 2127/2021, decided on 24.02.2021], M/s Sri Ranganathar Valves Private Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT) [Writ Petition No. 38488/2015, decided on 02.09.2020], M/s Bright Star Plastic Industries Vs. Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax & Others [Writ C No. 15265/2021, decided on 0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al movement of goods. Once, on inquiry, it was found that the person who issued the weighment slip and bilty were non-existent, the present proceedings are justified. He further submits that recently, this Court in M/s Malik Traders Vs. State of U.P. & Others [Writ Tax No. 1237/2021, decided on 18.10.2023] has held that the prima facie burden is on the dealer to furnish details of actual physical movement of the goods and in absence of such documentary evidence, ITC cannot be legally granted. He prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the records. 8. It is admitted fact between the parties that the goods have been shown to be purchased from M/s Krishna Trading Compa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... remains upon the dealer claiming such ITC. Such a burden of proof cannot get shifted on the revenue. Mere production of the invoices or the payment made by cheques is not enough and cannot be said to be discharging the burden of proof cast under section 70 of the KVAT Act, 2003. The dealer claiming ITC has to prove beyond doubt the actual transaction which can be proved by furnishing the name and address of the selling dealer, details of the vehicle which has delivered the goods, payment of freight charges, acknowledgement of taking delivery of goods, tax invoices and payment particulars etc. The aforesaid information would be in addition to tax invoices, particulars of payment etc. In fact, if a dealer claims Input Tax Credit on purchases....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of the Commissioner Commercial Tax Vs. M/s Ramway Foods Ltd. (supra) has held that the primary responsibility of claiming the benefit is upon the dealer to prove and establish the actual physical movement of goods, genuineness of transactions, etc. and if the dealer fails to prove the actual physical movement of goods, the benefit cannot be granted. 19. The judgement relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner of Calcutta High Court in the cases of M/s LGW Industries Limited and others (supra) and Sanchita Kundu and another (supra) is of no aid to the petitioner as recently Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of M/s Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited (supra) has specifically held that onus is to be discharged by the petitioner to....