TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1278
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rongly availed by him with the applicable interest and penalty pertaining to financial years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21. [3]. The Authorised Representatives of the Revenue in their brief submission have contended that although the demand was initially for Rs. 53,95,795/-, a sum of Rs. 13,03,063/- was found already reversed by the appellant along with interest and penalty for the year 2017-18 and the same having been appropriated by the revenue, the reduced demand now stands at Rs. 38,84,673/- pertaining to 2018-19 and 2020-21. With regard to the contention of the taxpayer that the whole amount of excess ITC availed by him has been voluntarily reversed before issuance of the demand order, the submission of the Revenue is that the taxpayer did not adduce any proof to map the reversal to the demand. [4]. The learned counsel of the taxpayer, on the other hand, has claimed that there is no merit in the contention of the revenue. The taxpayer had voluntarily reversed the entire amount of ITC availed by him along with applicable interest and penalty based on self-assessment before the demand was issued but the revenue has refused to appropriate the amount in dispute on flimsy ground....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 150044 150044 2019-20 698983 16099385 16099385 694063 13644152 13644152 4921 2455233 2455233 2020-21 65556 10360109 10360109 67867 10270544 10270544 2311 89564 89564 2021-22 0 3623697 3623697 297 4446653 4446653 -297 -822956 -822956 TABLE 2 FY Excess ITC availed IGST CGST SGST/UTGST Total 2018-19 1192 150044 150044 301280 2019-20 4921 2544233 2544233 4915387 2020-21 - 89564 89564 179128 6113 2694841 2694841 5395795 [9]. Based on such computation, the revenue issued the SCN and asked the tax payer either to pay the sum of Rs. 53,95,795/- as in Table 2 within 30 days of receiving notice to avail the benefit under Section 73(8), CGST Act or to show cause as to why the excess ITC availed by him along with applicable interest and penalty shall not be recovered from him. For the sake of clarity it would be appropriate to reproduce paragraph 3 to 8 of the show cause notice dated 29.12.2023 which reads as under:- 3. Now, therefore, M/s D.R Steel Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. (GSTIN-19AAAC....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le under section 50 within thirty days of issue of show cause notice, no penalty shall be payable and all proceedings in respect of the said notice shall be deemed to be concluded" 6. If no cause is shown against the action proposed to be taken within the stipulated period as mentioned above and/or the noticee fails to appear before the adjudicating authority when the case is posted for hearing, the case shall be decided ex-parte on the basis of evidence(s) available with the Department. 7. This notice is issued without prejudice to any action that may be initiated against the noticee under the CGST Act, 2017/ the Rules formed there under or any other law for the time being in force. 8. The said Noticee is at liberty to examine or to take extracts of the original relied upon documents on making prior appointment with the Superintendent of Central Tax, Anti-Evasion, Kolkata North Commissionerate, GST Bhawan, 180 Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata-700107, on any working day during office hours. [10]. The Revenue also served an electronic summary of the SCN in Form GST DRC-01 in terms of Rule 142(1) of CGST Rules, 2017. In response, the taxpayer had submitted st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 7. Therefore, on the basis of the above discussion and findings, the following order is passed. Order (i) I disallow Input Tax Credit amounting to Rs. 53,95,795/-[Rupees fifty three lakh ninety five thousand seven hundred ninety five only (IGST-Rs. 6,113/- + CGST-Rs. 26,94,841/- + SGST- Rs. 26,94,841/-)], availed and utilized by the noticee during the financial year from 2018-19 to 2020-21, for violation of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act read with Rule 36 of the CGST Rules and order for recovery of the same amount under Section 73(9) of the CGST Act; (ii) I appropriate the amount of ITC of Rs. 13,03,063/- (Rupees thirteen lakh three thousand sixty three only (IGST-Rs. 5,027/- CGST-Rs. 6,49,018/ SGST-Rs. 6,49,018/-)] already paid by them out of the amount of Rs. 53,95,795/-(IGST-Rs. 6,113/- + CGST- Rs. 26,94,841/- + SGST- Rs. 26,94,841/-), as discussed in Para 5.4 above; (iii) I order for payment of applicable interest at an appropriate rate under Section 50(3) of the CGST Act on the amount as confirmed in Sl. No. (i) above by the noticee and order for recovery of the same from him under Section 73(9) of the CGST Act; (iv) I also appro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....I have carefully gone through the Show cause cum demand notice, the Order-in-Original, submission of the appellant in the grounds of appeal and other relevant documents submitted by the said appellant. 5.2. I like to tabulate the entire ITC issues as below for the FY 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21: FY 2018-19 ITC available in Table 8A of GSTR-9 ITC availed from the previous year -(Add) ITC kept for the next year Table 8C (Less) ITC available but not claimed Table 8F (Less) Net ITC available for the current year ITC availed in GSTR-3B Diff. CGST 14289360 10078 1144350 217974 12937114 14462874 1525 SGST 14289360 10078 1144350 217974 12937114 14462874 1525760 IGST 14287 0 0 0 14287 15479 1192 The taxpayer submitted a DRC-03 under debit entry No. DC1906200082481 dated 22/6/20 from cash ledger wherein I find that they mentioned the reversal of Rs. 13,89,473/- each under CGST & SGST in cash against ITC availed for FY 2018-19. 5.3. For the residual excess ITC of Rs. 136,287/- (each under CGST & SGST] and Rs. 1192/- [IGST] they submitted that, ITC to the tune of Rs. 69,9....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4381 5.8. IN this Financial Year of 2019-20, they had similar issues in respect of M/s Baba Bholanath Associates involving ITC of Rs.66,112.28/- each under CGST & SGST. I find the GSTR-2A reflected the invoices and the appellant taxpayer duly availed the ITC within due time. However, on further verification, I observed that, the supplier filed GSTR-3B after prescribed time of filing. 5.9. In the year 2020-21, I did not find any excess availment of ITC. The figures are given under in tabular form: FY 2020-21 ITC available in Table 8A of GSTR-9 ITC availed from the previous year -(Add) ITC kept for the next year Table 8C (Less) ITC available but not claimed Table 8F (Less) Net ITC available for the current year ITC availed in GSTR-3B Diff. CGST 10383503 0 0 0 10383503 10360108 0 SGST 10383503 0 0 0 10383503 10360108 0 IGST 65738 0 0 0 65738 65556 0 5.10. The summarisation of demands and excess availment of ITC is tabulated below in a year-wise fashion: Year Excess ITC availed IGST CGST SGST Total 2018-19 1192 66304.23 663....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C availed by him. There is, therefore, no merit in the instant appeal. ii) Excess ITC availed by the taxpayer has already been reversed by the taxpayer and the Revenue has also acknowledged the receipt of the same in Form GST DRC-04 and, therefore, no appeal lies against the taxpayer. FINDINGS : [19]. As we have gathered from the facts of the case, submissions of the parties and materials produced by them, the genesis of the case is the show cause-cum-demand notice dated 29.12.2023 issued to the taxpayer by the Revenue under Section 73(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. In the very first paragraph of the said show cause notice, the contention of the Revenue is that from a comparison between the self assessed return submitted by the tax payer in GSTR 3B and the information available in auto generated GSTR 2A, the Revenue came to notice that the taxpayer availed excess ITC to the tune of Rs. 53,95,795/- during 03 financial years from 2018-2021. [20]. In paragraph 2 of the said notice, the revenue in Table 1 has shown year-wise comparison between GSTR 3B and GSTR 2A and in Table 2 the actual amount of excess ITC availed by the taxpayer under IGST, CGST and SGST has been highl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 22.06.2020 and an equal sum was also debited from the credit ledger of the taxpayer under SGST vide same debit entry dated 22.06.2020. Similarly, a sum of Rs. 13,89,473/- was reversed by the taxpayer by debiting the same from his electronic cash ledger vide debit entry No. DC1906200082481. An equal sum stood debited from his electronic cash ledger under SGST by same debit entry dated 22.06.2020 which confirms that the amount in dispute was credited to the coffer of the revenue. [25]. It would appear from page 9-10 of the OIO that the adjudicating authority categorically apportioned reversal of ITC of the sum of Rs. 13,03,063/- along with interest of Rs.27,405/- and penalty of Rs.4,29,164/-. The order of the adjudicating authority in this regard reads as under:- 7. Therefore, on the basis of the above discussion and findings, the following order is passed. Order (i) I disallow Input Tax Credit amounting to Rs. 53,95,795/-[Rupees fifty three lakh ninety five thousand seven hundred ninety five only (IGST- Rs. 6,113/- + CGST-Rs. 26,94,841/- + SGST- Rs. 26,94,841/-)], availed and utilized by the noticee during the financial year from 2018-19 to 2020-21, f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty came to the conclusion that for the year 2018-19, the taxpayer credited Rs. 13,89,473/- each under CGST and SGST by way of debiting the same from his cash ledger vide debit entry No. DC1906200082481 dated 22.06.2020. Similarly, for the financial year 2019-20, the taxpayer reversed ITC @ Rs. 5,98,500/- each under CGST and SGST by way of debiting the same from his credit ledger vide debit entry No. D11906200124282 dated 22.06.2020. As discussed, the Revenue originally demanded Rs. 53,95,795/- from the taxpayer towards discharge of reversal of excess ITC availed by him. But in the memo of appeal they have categorically stated that the demand now stands at Rs. 38,84,673/- because a sum of Rs. 13,03,063/- already paid by the taxpayer along with interest and penalty has been appropriated by the revenue. Although admittedly, the disputed amount has also been credited to the revenue's coffer, they have challenged the impugned order mainly on the ground that the taxpayer could not establish that he paid the said sum of money towards the discharge of his ITC reversal liability. Another point which has been raised by the appellant before us is that the appellate authority did not consider ....