M/S M. INDIA Enterprises Through Its Proprietor Om Swaroop vs. Principal Commissioner, Central Goods And Service Tax And Central Excise
Held
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to take input tax credits in respect of the delayed returns filed for the period June 2018 to March 2019. This decision was based on the combined effect of clause (5) of Section 16 of the CGST Act, which was inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 with retrospective effect from 01.07.2017, and the circular dated 15.10.2024 issued by the GST Policy Wing of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. The Court found that these provisions provided a basis for allowing ITC even with delayed return filings. Consequently, the orders passed by the respondents were set aside. The Court directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to claim the input tax credits. No issues were expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s M. India Enterprises, through its proprietor Om Swaroop, filed a writ petition before the Jharkhand High Court. The petition challenged orders passed by the respondents, identified as the Principal Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, and Superintendent of Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise. The core of the dispute appears to be the petitioner's claim for input tax credit (ITC) for the period June 2018 to March 2019, which was likely denied or restricted due to delayed return filings. The judgment does not specify the exact amount in dispute, nor does it detail the procedural history beyond the filing of the writ petition and the issuance of the impugned orders.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim input tax credit (ITC) for the period June 2018 to March 2019, notwithstanding the delayed filing of returns, in light of the newly inserted clause (5) of Section 16 of the CGST Act and the subsequent circular dated 15.10.2024. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that they should be allowed to take input tax credits for the delayed returns filed for the period June 2018 to March 2019. This argument is implicitly based on the applicability of the new legal provisions and the circular that provide relief in such situations. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (CGST authorities).
Sections Cited
Section 16
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2025:JHHC:10867-DB
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(T) No. 3123 of 2024
-------- M/s M. India Enterprises, a proprietary concern through its proprietor Om Swaroop, Aged about 44 years, Son of Sri K.P. Choudhary, Resident of Chanakyapuri, P.O. Chira Chas, P.S. Chas, District Bokaro-827 013. … … Petitioner(s)
Versus
Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise, having its office at Central Revenue Building, Main Toad, P.O. Chutia, P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi.
Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise, Division-1, Bokaro, having his Office at Sector-IV, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District Bokaro-827 004. 3. Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise, Range-III, Bokaro, having his Office at Sector-IV, P.O. & P.S. B.S. City, District B
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 Jharkhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.