M/S Tt Steel Service INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. “issue a writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the impugned OIA No. MYS-GST-000-APP-PKS-15-2024-25 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24244 dated 23.01.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 2 enclosed at Annexure - A;
ii. hold that the Petitioner has not made any belated payment of IGST and as such the Petitioner is not liable to pay any interest on the IGST paid in October and November 2022 in respect manpower supply services received by the Petitioner during the period July 2017 to November 2022;
iii. hold that the Petitioner is eligible to avail the ITC of Rs. 1,99,60,521/-the IGST paid in October and November 2022 in terms of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act read with Circular No. 211/5/2024-GST dated 26.06.2024;
iv. hold that the penalties in terms of Section 74 are not imposable on the Petitioner;
v. pass such further orders and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.”
The petitioner had availed of secondment services as regards which the petitioner had made payment of GST on the services availed. However, the ITC was not claimed in the relevant year i.e., 2017 to 2022, but had been availed of subsequently. Which came to be disallowed by respondent on account of belated claim in terms of Sub-Section (4) of Section 16 of HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24244 the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘CGST’ for short). It is challenging the same the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the above issue has already been considered and decided by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/S. TOYODA GOSEI SOUTH INDIA PVT. LTD., Vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CETRAL TAX AND ANOTHER1, wherein this Court has considered the aspect of the time period in which a claim could be made under Sub-Section (4) of Section 16 of the CGST Act as also the entitlement for considering the valuation of the payment on secondment fees availed and as such, he submits that the said order would be equally applicable to the present matter.
Sri Jeevan J. Neeralgi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents also confirms the said submission
1 WP.NO.5598/2024 DD 03.04.2025. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24244 made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order OIA NO.MYS-GST-000- APP-PKS-15-2024-25 dated 23.01.2025 passed by respondent No.2 at Annexure-A is quashed. iii) The petitioner is relegated to the stage of filing reply to the show cause notice at Annexure-P dated 29.09.2023. iv) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to submit such documents as may be necessary to satisfy the requirements of the decisions of this Court in the case of M/S. TOYOTA OF INDIA AND OTHERS2 and the Hon'ble AUDIT-II, DELHI & ANOTHER3, which shall be so 2 W.P.NO.22952/2023 DD 21.08.2024 3 2025 (2) TMI 245 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24244 considered by the respondents in accordance with law. v) This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. vi) Liberty is also reserved to the petitioner to seek the benefit of the Amnesty scheme before respondent No.1 by converting the proceedings from Section 74 to Section 73 for the purpose of availing Amnesty scheme under Section 128A of the CGST Act. If such a request for availing Amnesty Scheme is made by the petitioner, the respondent No.3 shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
KTY List No.: 2 Sl No.: 19
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.