Appellate Court Must Re-Appreciate Evidence To Determine Lesser Offence Under Section 386 CrPC If Graver Charge Is Not Sustained: Supreme Court SARFAESI Act | Provisions Override Other Laws Including Principles Of Res Judicata: Supreme Court Right To Information Act | CCTV Footage Cannot Be Provided Directly To Applicant If It Falls Under Section 8(1)(g) Exemptions: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Convenience Of Wife Is The Paramount Consideration In Transfer Of Matrimonial Proceedings: Andhra Pradesh High Court Inefficient Case Management By State Law Officers Impedes Justice: Allahabad High Court Directs Principal Secretary (Law) To Reform Procedures Section 24 CPC | Convenience Of Wife Is A Primary Consideration For Transfer Of Matrimonial Proceedings, But Virtual Appearance Can Mitigate Hardship: Andhra Pradesh High Court Son Cannot Claim Co-Ownership Or Resist Eviction Based On Alleged Financial Contribution To Property Purchased In Mother’s Name: Delhi High Court Order 33 Rule 1 CPC | Applicant Must Prove Inability To Pay Court Fee With Cogent Evidence; Mere Assertion Of Indigence Is Insufficient: Chhattisgarh High Court Plaintiff Must Establish Independent Right To Possession, Cannot Rely Solely On Lacunae In Defendant’s Evidence: Delhi High Court Successor Cannot Remain Silent: Bombay High Court Upholds Tenant's Right To Purchase Agricultural Land, Rules Rejection Before 1961 Amendment No Bar Single Mother Has Right To Determine Child’s Surname And Alter Biological Father's Name In Birth Certificate: Calcutta High Court Court Can Sanction Professional Fees Of Valuers Exceeding Prescribed Ceiling Post-Assignment: Bombay High Court MACT | Appellate Court Can Reduce Compensation Even If Insurer’s Appeal Challenges Quantum While Claimant Seeks Enhancement: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Amendment Of Written Statement To Correct Internal Inconsistencies Does Not Amount To Withdrawal Of Admission: Delhi High Court Oral Family Partition Valid Even If Unregistered: Jharkhand High Court Power Of Attorney Lacking Explicit Interest Is Revocable Regardless Of 'Irrevocable' Label: Gujarat High Court DRC Act | Summary Eviction Proceedings Cannot Be Converted Into Extended Litigation By Seeking To File Additional Documents Post-Pleadings: Delhi High Court

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