BharatTaxGST

M/S Sagun Copper Conductors vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of

Original PDF →
WP/100527/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC02001774202408 February 2024Bench: HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR3 pages
For Petitioner: SRI SADIQ N. GOODWALA, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI GANGADHAR J.M., ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR SRI V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2837 WP No. 100527 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 100527 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S SAGUN COPPER CONDUCTORS PVT LTD NO. 103/1 REVADIHAL ROAD, TARIHAL HUBBALLI-580026. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ARATI WIFE OF MAHENDRA YADAV, AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, RESIDING AT ARJUN VIHAR, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580031. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SADIQ N. GOODWALA, ADVOCATE.) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580025, DIST. DHARWAD. 2. THE IN-CHARGE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER , COMMERCIAL TAX LGST-330, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580025, DIST. DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GANGADHAR J.M., ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR SRI V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 03-10-2023 BEARING NO. SARAKU MATTU SEVA TERIGE KAYDE-2017 RA NIYAMA 86(A) ADI ADESHA SANKYE.12/2023-24 DINANKA 03-10-2023/ (ANNEXURE-B), AND ETC.,. SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR Digitally signed by SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR Date: 2024.02.16 08:26:35 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2837 WP No. 100527 of 2024 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER The petitioner filed returns under the Goods and Service Tax Act for the financial year 2018-19 beyond the stipulated time. Therefore, the 2nd respondent passed the impugned order holding that the petitioner is not entitled for input tax credit since the returns were filed beyond the stipulated date as stated under section 16(4) of the GST Act.

2.

Sri Gangadhar J.M., learned Additional Advocate General submits that the validity of section 16(4) of the Act has been upheld by this Court by following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. He further submits that against the impugned order passed under section 16(4) of the Act, an efficacious remedy of appeal as provided under section 107 of the Act. Therefore, the present petition filed without exhausting the alternative remedy of appeal is not maintainable.

3.

The petitioner having not exhausted the alternative remedy of appeal provided under section 107 of the Act, the present petition is not maintainable. NC: 2024:KHC-D:2837 WP No. 100527 of 2024

4.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under section 107 of the Act, before the juri ictional appellate authority and if such an appeal is filed, the appellate authority to consider the same in accordance with law.

5.

The time spent in prosecuting this petition shall be excluded for the purpose of computing limitation in filing the appeal before the prescribed appellate authority. All contentions are kept open. JUDGE

MRK CT:GSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

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.