M/S. Mk Agrotech Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER IN REVISION DTD 16.07.2024 PASSED BY RESPONDENTS FOR THE MONTH OF MAR 20 AT ANNEXURE-V AND ETC.
IN WP NO. 5003/2025
BETWEEN: M/S MK AGRO TECH PRIVATE LIMITED NO. 389 KAVERI LAYOUT M B ROAD SRIRANGPATNA MANDYA KARNATAKA 571 438 REP BY IMRAN KHAN DIRECTOR INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 ...PETITIONER (BY SMT. MEGHNA LAL SMT. VANI DWEVEDI & SRI. RAVI RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATES)
AND:
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAXES MYSURU CGST COMISSIONERATE, VINAYA MARGA, SIDDHARTHA NAGAR, HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24039 AND 1 OTHER
MYSURU - 570 011
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAXES, BANNIMANTAP CENTRAL TAX DIVISION MYSURU GST COMMISSIONERATE, MYSURU ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JEEVAN.J.NEERALIGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER-IN-REVISION NO. 04/2024-25 DATED 24/09/2024 ENCLOSED AS ANNX-A PASSED BY R1 IN ITS ENTIRETY.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
ORAL ORDER
The Registry has raised an objection as regard production of certified copy of the impugned order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been received by way of email and the printout has been filed and there is no certified copy of the same that has been received, accepting the said submission, office objections in all these matters stand overruled. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24039 AND 1 OTHER
Sri Jeevan J. Neeraligi, learned counsel has entered appearance for respondent Nos.1 and 2 in W.P.No.5003/2025 and for respondent Nos.2 to 4 in other three matters.
The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs: “IN WP.NO.14449/2024
a. “Issue Writ of Certiorari or Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Impugned Order dated 15.11.2023 passed by the ld. Appellate Authority i.e. Resp 4 at Annexure-K Bearing No MYS-ADC/JC(A)-73/2023-24 GST in so for as the petitioner is concerned.
b. Declare Circular no.135/05/2020-GST dated 31.03.2020 (Annexure-D) issued by resp-4 is ultra vires the CGST/KGST ACT and Rules made there under as being unconstitutional in so far as the petitioner is concerned.
c. Issued any other writ or direction deemed fir in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity including the cost of the Writ Petition.”
IN WP.NO.14467/2024
a. Issue Writ of Certiorari or Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Impugned Order dated 15.11.2023 passed by the ld. Appellate Authority i.e. Resp 2 at Annexure-K Bearing No MYS- ADC/JC(A)-73/2023-24 GST in so for as the petitioner is concerned.
b. Declare Circular no.135/05/2020-GST dated 31.03.2020 (Annexure-D) issued by resp-4 is ultra vires the CGST/KGST ACT and Rules made there under as being unconstitutional in so far as the petitioner is concerned. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24039 AND 1 OTHER
c. Issued any other writ or direction deemed fir in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity including the cost of the Writ Petition.
IN WP.NO.28211/2024
a. Issue Writ of Certiorari or Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Order dated 29.04.2024 passed by the Respondent 4 for the month of Oct’19 at Annexure-U Bearing No.DIN – 20240457YY00002244247 and Or.
b. Issue Writ of Certiorari or Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Order in Revision dated 16.07.2024 passed by Respondent -4 for the month of Mar’20 at Annexure-V Bearing No.DIN – 20240457YY0000710641. c. Issue Writ of Certiorari or Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Order in Revision dated 16.07.2024 passed by Respondent -4 for the month of April’20 at Annexure-W Bearing No.DIN – 20240457YY000000EAD1
d. Declare Circular no.135/05/2020-GST dated 31.03.2020 (Annexure-D) issued by resp-4 is ultra vires the CGST/KGST ACT and Rules made there under as being unconstitutional in so far as the petitioner is concerned.
e. Issued any other writ or direction deemed fir in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity including the cost of the Writ Petition.
IN WP.NO.5003/2025
a. Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the Impugned Order-In-Revision No. 04/2024-25 dated 24.09.2024 enclosed as Annexure-A passed by Respondent No.1 in its entirety;
b. Hold that the refund of input tax credit of Rs. 13,70,16,878/-sanctioned to the Petitioner by Respondent No. 2 was in accordance with Proviso (ii) to Section 54 (3) HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24039 AND 1 OTHER
of the KGST Act, 2017 and rule 89(5) of the KGST Rules, 2017;
c. Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit by this Hon'bleCourt in the facts and circumstances of the case;
d. For such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.”
The petitioner seems to be a manufacturer and a dealer in respect of the refined vegetable oil, with one of the main inputs being pure sunflower oil.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the refund of the input has been limited to the rate of tax on the principle input, namely the crude sunflower oil, whereas for the purpose of the manufacture of refined sunflower oil other ingredients and inputs are also made use of, and as such, the petitioner would be entitled for refund of the input in respect of those items also, and therefore be provided input credit therefor.
The submission of Sri Ravi Raghavan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the issue has been decided by various Courts including this Court in the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24039 AND 1 OTHER
case of M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., Vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX1, more particularly, para 15 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference. “15. It is apparent from the above that the Appellate Authority had accepted that Circular No.135/05/2020 was applicable in cases where accumulation of ITC was due to reduction in tax. Nonetheless, the Appellate Authority was of the view that the petitioner was not entitled to refund by virtue of the last sentence of paragraph 3.2 of the Circular 135/5/2020, which provided that provisions of Clause (ii) of Sub- section (3) of Section 54 was inapplicable, where input and output supplies are the same.”
There is no dispute as regards the applicability of the decision in the Indian Oil Corporation’s case to the present matter inasmuch as the legal principle decided by this Court in that matter is equally applicable to the present matter.
In that view of the matter, I pass the following: :ORDER: i. WP.No.28211/2022 is allowed. ii. Certiorari is issued, the order in revision dated 29.04.2024 passed by respondent No. 4 at Annexure-U, the order in revision dated
1 2024:KHC:33454 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24039 AND 1 OTHER
2024 passed by respondent No.4 for the month of March, 2020 at Annexure V and the order in revision dated 16.07.2024 passed by respondent No.4 for the month of April, 2020 at Annexure-W are quashed. iii. WP.No.5003/2025 is allowed. iv. Certiorari is issued and the order in revision No.4/2024-25 dated 24.09.2024 at Annexure A, is quashed. v. Since the refund has already been made by the respondents, no direction is required to be issued as regard the refund. vi. In view of the disposal of W.P.No.5003/2025, W.P.No.14449/2024 and W.P.No.14467/2024 stand disposed of. (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
KTY List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9
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.