Parisons Agrotech Private Limited, Represented By Its Director N K Mohammed Ali v. Union Of INDIA, Represented By The Secretary

Court
Kerala High Court
Case number
WP(C)/8507/2023
Date of judgment
2 Aug 2024
Bench
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
Petitioner
PARISONS AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR N K MOHAMMED ALI,
Respondent
UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
CNR
KLHC010196612023

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 8507 OF 2023 PETITIONER:

PARISONS AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR N K MOHAMMED ALI, 6/1183, KUNHIPARI BUILDING, CHEROOTTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673 032.

BY ADVS.

K.P.ABDUL AZEES AKHIL SURESH T.ARCHANA BABY SAHLA B.

RESPONDENTS:

1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, 3RD FLOOR JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110 001.

2 CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110 001.

3 STATE OF KERALA. REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY (TAXES), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001.

4 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, TAX PAYER SERVICE CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673 006.

BY ADVS M.ALFRED LIONEL WINSTON (SC)(FOR R1 AND R2) JASMINE M.M (GP) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.08.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C)No.8507/2023 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P2 order of the 4th respondent denying to the petitioner certain amount of transitional credit which was claimed by the petitioner by filing a TRAN-1 form following the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Union of India & Another. v. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. & Another;

(2023) 1 SCC 562.

2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that Ext.P2 order is not sustainable in law. It is submitted that Ext.P2 order contains various contradictions and the reasons mentioned in Ext.P2 for holding that the petitioner is not entitled to the transitional credit are absolutely unsustainable in law.

3.

The learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 would contend that

W.P.(C)No.8507/2023 3 if the petitioner is in any manner aggrieved by Ext.P2 order, it is for the petitioner to approach the First Appellate Authority and all the contentions of the petitioner can be raised before the First Appellate Authority.

4.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, I am of the view that the petitioner must at least, at the first instance, avail the statutory remedies before approaching this Court by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Ext.P2 order is dated 22-02-2023 and this writ petition was filed in this Court on 09-03-2023. Therefore, the writ petition was filed at a time when the petitioner was within the period of limitation to file a first appeal against Ext.P2 order. Since this writ petition was admitted and was pending in this Court till today, I am of the view that the period from 09-03-2023 till today (02-08-2024) can

W.P.(C)No.8507/2023 4 be excluded for the purposes of limitation to enable the petitioner to file the first appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax/State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST/SGST Act) before the First Appellate Authority.

Therefore, this writ petition will stand ordered declining reliefs on the ground of availability of alternative remedy and permitting the petitioner to file a statutory appeal against Ext.P2 order. The period from 09-03-2023 till today (02-08-2024) shall stand excluded for the purposes of determining any period of limitation within which an appeal had to be preferred against Ext.P2 order.

Sd/- GOPINATH P.

JUDGE ats

W.P.(C)No.8507/2023 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8507/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER V. FILCO TRADE CENTRE P LTD, 2022 LIVELAW (SC) 628.

Exhibit P2 THE COPY OF REJECTION ORDER NO 32AACCP1581C1ZY/TRAN1/ORDER/2023

DATED 22/02/2023.

RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE VERIFIATION REPORT DATED 03-02-2023.

Original PDF on the eCourts judgment service →

Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.