Siva Automotive Trading Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Heard both sides.
It is not in dispute that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 17.06.2025 made in W.P.(MD)No.14543 of 2024 etc., batch. Paragraph Nos.23 & 24 of the said order reads as follows:- “23. However, an examination of the Circulars 183 & 193 also reveal that there are lapses on the part of the Respondent authorities to adhere to the procedure prescribed by the Board in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 168(1) of the Act. (a) Clause 4.1.1 of the Circular No.183 referred supra provides that in case where difference between the ITC claimed in Form GSTR-3B and available in Form GSTR-2A of the registered person in respect of a supplier for the said financial year exceeds Rs.5 Lakhs, the proper officer shall ask the registered person to produce a certificate from the Chartered Accountant of the Supplier as prescribed therein. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)Nos.2240 & 6582 of 2024 (b) Clause 4.1.2 of the Circular provides that where the difference between the ITC claimed in Form GSTR-3B and that available in Form GSTR-2A of the registered person in respect of a supplier for the said financial year is upto 5 lakhs, the proper office shall ask the claimant to produce a certificate from the concerned supplier as prescribed therein. (c ) Therefore, the Circular places the onus squarely on the proper officer in the process of verification of Section 16(2)(C) to first intimate the taxpayer of the discrepancy between Form GSTR-2A and Form GSTR-3B and then, more importantly, to ask the registered person to produce certificates under the Circulars either from the CA or from the supplier depending on the prescribed monetary criteria. (d) It is the proper officer who has been obliged to intimate the assessee of the process of resolution through production of certificates and to aid the assessee in such resolution. (e) The proper officer must expressly intimate the assessee and the mandate imposed on the proper officer is clear by use of the term “shall ask”. (f) Since in the impugned assessment proceedings there has not been any separate and express intimation to the petitioners highlighting the mechanism of reconciliation through production of certificates and the form/stipulations which such certificates must satisfy, it amounts to violation of the procedures as prescribed by the Board and binding on the proper officers. Consequently, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside on the ground of procedural arbitrariness.
The present Writ Petitions are disposed of setting aside the impugned orders of assessment/adjudication and granting liberty to the respondent authority to reconsider the claim of input tax credit by the petitioners in accordance with Circular no. 183/15/2022-GST and 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)Nos.2240 & 6582 of 2024 193/05/2023-GST and the amendments made to Section 16 of the Act after affording the petitioners a reasonable opportunity of hearing within a period of 4 months from the date of uploading of web copy without waiting for the receipt of certified copy.”
The present writ petitions are also disposed of on the same lines. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi To The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Kamarajar Salai Assessment Circle, Madurai-625 020. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)Nos.2240 & 6582 of 2024 G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. rmi W.P(MD)Nos.2240 & 6582 of 2024 08.10.2025 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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.