Sri Surya Earth Movers vs. The Superintendent Of GST And Central Excise
Held
The Court held that the amendment to Section 16 of the GST Act, specifically the insertion of sub-section (5), rendered the original grounds for disallowing ITC potentially invalid. The assessment needed to be re-done considering this amendment.
Facts
The petitioner challenged an order disallowing Input Tax Credit (ITC) solely on the grounds of claims being lodged beyond the period prescribed under Section 16(4) of the GST Act. An amendment, Section 16(5), was subsequently introduced, providing for ITC claims for certain financial years.
Key Issues
Whether the disallowance of ITC based on the time limit under Section 16(4) is sustainable in light of the subsequent amendment introducing Section 16(5) for certain financial years.
Sections Cited
Section 16(4), Section 16(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 15.04.2024, on the premise that the Input Tax Credit has been disallowed only on the ground that the claims have been lodged beyond the period prescribe
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.