The Kerala High Court dismissed the petition on the problem of Claim of Transitional Credit as the taxpayer could claim the legal Remedy under the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax ( KSGST/CGST ) Act, 2017 Mr Shameem Ahamed appeared for the petitioner, Ms Jasmine M. M., Government Pleader for the 1st respondent and Mr Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
The petitioner Metalex Agencies, contested the assessment order under the provisions of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax ( KSGST/CGST ) Act, 2017. The appellant is a registered dealer under the provisions of the KSGST Act, 2017, and filed its returns for the FY 2017-18 which were examined.
Particular discrepancies for the transitional credit asserted through the petitioner in the return were noticed for which the applicant was issued a Show Cause Notice.
On verification of the electronic credit ledger, it was seen that the applicant has claimed a CGST amount of Rs. 62,38,303/- as transitional credit for TRAN – 1 on 19.09.2017 as per Column No. 6(K) of the GSTR 9, the applicant claimed CGST amount of Rs. 62,38,303 as transitional credit supra.
Bill No. 15538 was not seen and it was noticed the wrong amount was claimed against other bills. Certain bills were not visible. In the first stance, it was observed that the applicant had breached Section 140 read with Rule 117 of the CGST Act and Rules made thereunder concerning his claim for transitional credit.
A notice was been issued to the applicant seeking him to provide the documents, bills, etc to assist his claim towards the transitional credit. The documents have been examined by the 3rd respondent that the applicant submitted and furnished a report to the 1st respondent for proceeding with the assessment proceedings.
A notice under Section 73 of the CGST/KSGST Act, 2017 is been issued to the petitioner to sustain his claim for the TRAN credit claimed through him as cited in the show cause notice.
The 1st respondent took note of the report that the 3rd respondent submitted and, thereafter passed the order. The applicant has been disallowed the trans credit of Rs.8,63,813/- to which interest and penalty have been imposed under the Act.
Under the provisions of section 107 of the CGST/KSGST Act, 2017 there is a provision to file a petition against the impugned order, the applicant stated, have the court invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the expressed order as the petition can be a useless practice as the claim of the petitioner is in regard of the excise duty element allegedly paid by the petitioner.
The appellate authority will study all the documents and evidence provided by the petitioner at the time of deciding the plea, viewed by Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh.
Read Also: A Step-by-Step Procedure to File Online GST TRAN 1 Form
Hence the counsel’s opinion on the applicant is not valid as no express provision for remanding the matter back to the assessing authority, the petition shall be a useless practice. The writ petition based on the availability of another remedy is been dismissed by the court.
| Case Title | Metalex Agencies Vs State Tax Officer |
| Case Number | Wp(c) No. 2205 of 2024 |
| Date | 18.01.2024 |
| for the Petitioner | Mr B.Raveendran, M. P. Shameem Ahamed, Akhil Philip Manithottiyil, Daniya Rasheed Palliyalil, Naeem M. M. |
| for Respondent | Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, Jasmine M. M. |
| Kerala High Court | Read Order |
