Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Procedural Violations in Issuance of Show-Cause Notice Cannot be Overlooked": Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Denial of Input Tax Credit to Lokenath Construction Pvt. Ltd.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Calcutta has quashed both the show-cause notice and subsequent order denying Input Tax Credit (ITC) to Lokenath Construction Private Limited, citing procedural violations and jurisdictional errors by the West Bengal GST authorities.

Legal Point: The legal crux of the judgment revolves around the procedural propriety of the show-cause notice issued under Section 73(1) of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017, and the rightful claim of Input Tax Credit under Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017. The court critically examined whether the denial of ITC was justified when procedural norms and jurisdictional mandates were not adhered to by the tax authorities.

The appeal arose from a show-cause notice dated August 22, 2023, issued by the WBGST Authorities, claiming that Lokenath Construction had availed ITC without proper evidence of tax payment by its suppliers. The contention of the appellant was that the show-cause notice was procedurally flawed as it did not verify facts from the supplier's end before denying the credit.

The court highlighted the procedural anomaly where the tax authority failed to verify the tax payment details from the supplier before issuing the show-cause notice. Citing the principle set in the Suncraft Energy Private Limited case, the court underscored that tax authorities must first proceed against the supplier in such cases.

The adjudicating authority’s decision to reject certificates from Chartered Accountants without seeking clarifications was criticized. The court pointed out that unilateral decisions without providing an opportunity to the assessee to clarify discrepancies were procedurally unjust.

It was observed that the findings of the adjudicating authority extended beyond the allegations in the show-cause notice, indicating a breach of the principles of natural justice.

The court applied precedents including the Suncraft Energy case and the Bharti Airtel Ltd. case, emphasizing that the taxpayer's right to ITC cannot be impeded without substantive evidence of collusion or fraud involving the taxpayer.

Decision: The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside both the order dated December 28, 2023, and the initial show-cause notice. The court directed that the tax authorities first address any discrepancies with the supplier directly and only under exceptional circumstances, as outlined in relevant GST guidelines, should they proceed against the taxpayer.

Date of Decision: May 2, 2024

Lokenath Construction Private Limited v. Tax/Revenue Government of West Bengal and Others

Latest Legal News