Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1945 WA NO. 225 OF 2024 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT WP(C) 3991/2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
ADAM TRADERS, 818-2, PALA, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. ROBY ABRAHAM, PIN - 686575 BY ADVS.
K.LATHA JOMTON F. PAYANKAN GAYATHRI NARENDRANATH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TAXPAYER SERVICES DIVISION, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, MINI CIVIL STATION, PALA, PIN - 686575 2 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 3 THE GST COUNCIL THROUGH ITS CHAIRPERSON, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, DELHI G.P.O.,, PIN - 110001 4 THE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX NETWORK, EAST WING 4TH FLOOR, WORLD MARK - I AERO CITY, NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY ITS - CHAIRMAN,, PIN - 110037 5 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
WA No.225/2024 -:2:- 6 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE), MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 OTHER PRESENT:
SR.GP-V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA No.225/2024 -:3:- J U D G M E N T Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J.
The appellant is a proprietorship business concern registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, the Act) engaged in the business of trading mobile phones, suitcases, footwear items, etc 2.
The 1st respondent scrutinized the returns filed by the appellant for the period 2017-2018 and found certain irregularities. After giving show cause notice, the 1st respondent proceeded against the appellant to determine the tax under Section 73 of the Act. The 1st respondent passed Ext.P5 order after hearing the appellant under Section 73 of the Act demanding a sum of `1,03,63,247/- being the input credit availed and utilised wrongly for the period from July 2017 to March 2018 along with interest and penalty. Ext.P5(a) is the summary of Ext.P5. The appellant challenged Exts.P5 and P5(a) by filing the
WA No.225/2024 -:4:- writ petition before the learned Single Judge, who dismissed it, relegating the appellant to the statutory appellate remedy. It is challenging the said judgment; the appellant is before us.
3.
We have heard Smt.Latha K., the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.V.K.Shamsudheen, the learned Senior Government Pleader.
The 1st respondent passed Ext.P5 order after complying with all the statutory formalities. The appellant was given show cause notice under Section 73(1) of the Act, and he gave a reply. Ext.P5 order would show that even though the appellant sought time to produce their books of accounts and sufficient time was given to produce the same, the appellant failed to produce the books of accounts. After hearing the appellant and perusing the available documents, the 1st respondent found that the appellant had wrongly availed input tax credit to the tune of `1,03,63,247/- for the period from July 2017 to March 2018. The appellant challenges the said factual finding in the writ petition. The jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked to adjudicate factual disputes. The learned Single
WA No.225/2024 -:5:- Judge has rightly found that the remedy open to the appellant is to prefer a statutory appeal against Ext.P5. The writ appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/- DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE Rp