Case Analysis: Tvl.
Jayalakshmi Auto Products vs. Union of India & Others
Case Name: Tvl.
Jayalakshmi Auto Products vs. Union of India & Others
Case No.:
W.P. No. 3522 of 2022
Court:
High Court of Judicature at Madras
Date of Order:
November 8, 2024
Presiding Judge:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice C. Saravanan
Summary of the Case
The case pertained to the belated availing of input tax
credit (ITC) under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax (TNGST)
Act, 2017. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned
order issued by the Assistant Commissioner of GST, citing lack of jurisdiction
and violation of natural justice principles.
Facts of the Case
1.
Petitioner: Tvl. Jayalakshmi Auto Products, represented by its
Managing Partner, A. Ramesh Babu.
2.
Respondents:
o Union of India (Ministry of Finance)
o Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC)
o Officials from GST & Central Excise Departments.
3.
The petitioner claimed that the
input tax credit was availed beyond the prescribed timelines under Section 16.
4.
The amendment to Section 16 of the
GST Act was made pursuant to GST Council recommendations, introducing further
procedural requirements.
Submissions by the Parties
- Petitioner’s
Submission:
The impugned order was issued without jurisdiction and in violation of
natural justice. The petitioner argued for relief based on the amended
provisions of Section 16(5) of the TNGST Act.
- Respondent’s
Submission:
The counsel for the respondents contended that the petitioner failed to
adhere to the procedural timeline for availing ITC, which was crucial for
compliance with GST regulations.
Findings and Judgment
1.
Court’s
Observations:
o The amendment to Section 16 was duly noted as a remedial
measure to align with GST Council recommendations.
o The Hon’ble Court emphasized the need for a thorough
verification of facts by the respondents.
2.
Judgment:
o The writ petition was allowed.
o The Court directed the respondents to reassess the
petitioner’s claim, ensuring compliance with the amended provisions of the
TNGST Act.
o No costs were imposed, and any interim petitions were closed
accordingly
Conclusion
The Court recognized the procedural error in denying ITC due
to delays and upheld the petitioner’s right to relief under the amended GST
framework. The case reaffirms the principle of fair opportunity and natural
justice in administrative proceedings.
Disclaimer: All the Information is based on the notification, circular and order issued by the Govt. authority and judgement delivered by the court or the authority information is strictly for educational purposes and on the basis of our best understanding of laws & not binding on anyone.
Click here
