Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 13200 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S:
ADWAITH MOTORS MALIAKAL BUILDING, POOZHIKOL P O, KADUTHURUTHY, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETROR SRI.
PRADEEPKUMAR C.T, PIN - 686604 BY ADVS.
K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR G.REMADEVI HARIMA HARIHARAN DHEERAJ SASIDHARAN RAJATH R NATH SREE HARIDEV RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE TAX OFFICER OFFICE OF THE STATE TAX OFFICER, TAX PAYER SERVICES CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, NORTH GATE, VAIKOM, PIN - 686141 2 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE), MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 3 CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 4 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO TAXES, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. RESHMITA RAMACHANDRAN-GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 13200 OF 2024 2 JUDGMENT The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- “i. Call for the records leading to Ext. P1 Order and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or orders or directions setting aside Ext. P1 Order passed by the 1st respondent.
iii. To declare that Sections 16(2)(c), 16(2)(aa) read with Rule 36(4) of the GST Acts and Rules are ultra vires and are against Article 14, Article 19(1)(g), and Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
iv. To declare that in case of detection of any mismatch in the GSTR 2A and 3B of any assessee under GST laws, the CGST/SGST Department must conduct a cross-verification and determine whether the assessee or his supplier has failed to upload their transaction details properly.
v. To declare that once the purchaser assessee is found to possess valid tax-suffered invoice, the Department shall initiate action against the supplier assessee to recover unpaid tax instead of denying the eligible ITC of the purchaser assessee.” 2.After some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would like to confine his prayer for disposal of the rectification application in Ext.P2 by the 1st respondent, expeditiously, in accordance with the law.
3.Considering the said prayer and submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition stands disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law on Ext.P2 application filed by the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably within a period of
WP(C) NO. 13200 OF 2024 3 two months.
The petitioner may file appeal against the impugned order, if he is so advised.
Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE SJ
WP(C) NO. 13200 OF 2024 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13200/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28-12-2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION PETITION DATED 26-03-2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT