M/S Toyota Techno Park INDIA PVT LTD vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER NO.F.NO.GEXCOM/ADJN/GST/835/2023-ADKN-O/0 AND ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO.117/2023-24 6105/2023 DATED 30.12.2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT ENCLOSED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka NC: 2025:KHC:14433 ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “a) 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 order No. F. No GEXCOM/ADJN/GST/835/2023- ADKN-O/o and Order-In-Original No.117/2023-24 6105/2023 dated 30.12.2023 passed by the Respondent enclosed at Annexure-A;
b) Hold that the Petitioner has rightly availed input tax credit of Rs.1,29,33,922/- in respect of the Integrated Tax paid under reverse charge mechanism on the manpower supply services received by the Petitioner during the period July 2017 to March 2021 vide Annexure-A;
c) Pass such further order(s) and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.”
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.
In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the impugned Order at Annexure – A dated 30.12.2023 issued by the respondent in order to point out that denial of Input Tax Credit in favour of the petitioner for the period from July 2017 – March 2021 is illegal and NC: 2025:KHC:14433 arbitrary in the light of the Circular No.211/5/2024-GST dated 26.06.2024, which has been relied upon by this Court in M/s.Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others – W.P.No.22952/2023 dated 21.08.2024. It is therefore submitted that the impugned Order at Annexure – A deserves to be quashed to the extent of denial of Input Tax Credit in favour of the petitioner and the matter remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh, in accordance with law.
It is also submitted that the valuation for the purpose of payment of taxes plus interest is covered by Circular No.210/4/2024-GST dated 26.06.2024 and the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Thales India Private Limited Vs. Additional Commissioner of CGST, Audit – II, Delhi & Another – 2025 (2) TMI 245 – Delhi High Court. It is therefore submitted that the petition may be allowed and disposed of accordingly.
It is further submitted that though the respondent purportedly invoked Section 74(1) of the CGST / KGST Act for the purpose of initiating proceedings, the same may be treated / construed as proceedings under Section 73 of the CGST / KGST NC: 2025:KHC:14433 Act so as to enable the petitioner to avail the benefit of Amnesty scheme under Section 128A of the CGST Act.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.
A perusal of the material on record will indicate that insofar as challenge to the impugned Notice at Annexure – A coupled with the contention that the petitioner would be entitled to avail Input Tax Credit under Section 16(4) of the CGST / KGST Act is concerned, in the light of the aforesaid judgment of this Court in M/s. Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt. Ltd.’ case supra, petitioner is to be relegated back to the respondent for consideration of its claim in accordance with law in the light of the said decision and the Circular No.211/5/2024-GST dated 26.06.2024. 8. Insofar as the valuation regarding payment of tax and interests are concerned, in view of Circular No.210/4/2024-GST dated 26.06.2024 even this issue would necessarily have to be decided by the respondent in accordance with law and the decision of Delhi High Court in Thales India Private Limited Vs. NC: 2025:KHC:14433 Additional Commissioner of CGST, Audit – II, Delhi & Another – 2025 (2) TMI 245 – Delhi High Court.
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER
(i) The petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned Order at Annexure – A dated 30.12.2023 issued by the respondent is hereby quashed. (iii) Petitioner is relegated to the stage of filing reply to the Show Cause Notice at Annexure – S dated 27.09.2023 before the respondent. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file its reply, pleadings, documents, etc., before the respondent, who shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law bearing in mind the judgment of this Court in M/s. Toyota Kirloskar Motor – W.P.No.22952/2023 dated 21.08.2024;thedecision of Delhi Commissioner of CGST, Audit – II, Delhi & Another – NC: 2025:KHC:14433 2025 (2) TMI 245 – Delhi High Court; Circular No.211/5/2024-GST dated 26.06.2024 and Circular No.210/4/2024-GST dated 26.06.2024. (v) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. (vi) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to seek the benefit of Amnesty scheme before the respondent 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 shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 0
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.