TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 362
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assisted by Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty and Mr. Saptak Sanyal, learned Advocates appearing for the State in MAT 2459 of 2023 and Mr. Uday Shankar Bhattacharya and Mr. Tapan Bhanja, learned Advocates appearing for the CGST Authority. 3. MAT No. 2459 of 2023 has been filed challenging the order dated 04.12.2023 in WPA 2544 of 2023. In the said writ petition the appellant had challenged a show-cause notice dated 22nd August, 2023 issued by the WBGST Authorities on the ground that the notice has been issued without causing any verification from the supplier's end and denying credit to the appellant. The learned Writ Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the appellant to file the objection to the show-cause notice and the authority was directed to consider the same and take note of the judgment relied on by the appellant. The Court also directed that till the disposal of the objection no coercive action shall be taken against the appellant. It is contended before us by the learned Advocate for the appellant that in the writ petition the appellant had contended that the show-cause notice is without jurisdiction, more particularly in the light of the decision of this Court in Suncr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th the facts stated in the returns as available in GST common portal. If there was any clarification required for the assessee, it would have been well open to the adjudicating authority to call upon the assessee to do so and without such opportunity the adjudicating authority unilaterally proceeded with the matter. The law and the subject was considered by the Court in the case of Suncraft Energy Private Limited. 6. In the said case the assessee had impugned the order of the assessing officer who reversed the Input Tax Credit availed by the assessee therein under the provisions of the WBGST Act. In the said case the private respondent was the supplier of the assessee who provided supply of goods and services to the assessee who had made payment of tax to the private respondent at the time of effecting such purchase along with supply of goods/ services. However, in some of the invoices of the said supplier were not reflected in the GSTR-2A of the assessee for the Financial Year 2017-18. In the said case the assessing authority issued notices for recovery of ITC to which the assessee objected by stating that without conducting any enquiry of the supplier who was the private respond....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... buyer on non- payment of tax by the seller. In case of default in payment of tax by the seller, recovery shall be made from the seller however, reversal of credit from buyer shall also be an option available with the revenue authorities to address exceptional situations like missing dealer, closure of business by supplier or supplier not having adequate assets etc. 6. The effect and purport of Form GSTR-2A was explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. It was held that Form GSTR-2A is only a facilitator for taking a confirm decision while doing such self-assessment. Non-performance or nonoperability of Form GSTR-2A or for that matter, other forms will be of no avail because the dispensation stipulated at the relevant time obliged the registered persons to submit return on the basis of such self-assessment in Form GSTR-3B manually on electronic platform. In Arise India Limited and Ors. Versus Commissioner of Trade and Taxes, Delhi and Ors. MANU/DE/3361/2017, the challenge was to the constitutional validity of Section 9(2)(g) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (DVAT Act) as being violative of Article 14 of 19(g) of the Constitution of India. Section 9(2) o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d penalty were set aside. The decision in Arise India Limited was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the Government in Commissioner of Trade and Taxes, Delhi Versus Arise India Limited and the special leave petition was dismissed by judgment dated 10.01.2018, reported in MANU/SCOR/01183/2018. Though the above decision arose under the provisions of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, the scheme of availment of Input Tax Credit continues to remain the same even under the GST regime though certain procedural modification and statutory forms have been made mandatory. 9. The first respondent without resorting to any action against the fourth respondent who is the selling dealer has ignored the tax invoices produced by the appellant as well as the bank statement to substantiate that they have paid the price for the goods and services rendered as well as the tax payable there on, the action of the first respondent has to be branded as arbitrarily. Therefore, before directing the appellant to reverse the input tax credit and remit the same to the government, the first respondent ought to have taken action against the fourth respondent the selling dealer and unless and until the....