M/S. Winet Communications vs. The Superintendent
Held
The Court found that the amendment rendered the original grounds for disallowing ITC potentially invalid. Therefore, the impugned assessment order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for re-assessment.
Facts
The petitioner challenged an assessment order disallowing Input Tax Credit (ITC) solely on the grounds of being claimed beyond the period prescribed under Section 16(4) of the GST Acts. An amendment to Section 16 of the CGST Act was introduced via Section 118 of The Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, which inserted sub-sections (5) and (6).
Key Issues
Whether the disallowance of ITC based on the pre-amendment provisions of Section 16(4) of the GST Acts is sustainable in light of the subsequent amendment introducing Section 16(5) and (6).
Sections Cited
Section 16(4), Section 16(5), Section 118
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the assessment order dated 27.02.2022, on the premise that the Input Tax Credit has been disallowed only on the ground that the claims have been lodged beyond the period prescribed under Section
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.