SUNCRAFT ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra Court appeal filed by the writ petitioner is directed against the order passed in WPA 12153 of 2023 dtd. 21/6/2023. The appellant had impugned the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Ballygunge Charge, the Respondent No. 1 date 20/2/2023 by which the first respondent reversed the input tax credit availed by the appellant under the provisions of West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (WBGST Act). The 4th respondent is a supplier of the appellant who provided supply of goods and services to the appellant who had made payment of tax to the fourth respondent at the time of effecting such purchase along with the value of supply of goods/ services. However, in some of the invoices of the said supplier was not reflected in the GSTR 2A of the appellant for the Financial Year 2017-18. The first respondent issued notices for recovery of the input tax credit availed by the appellant and the grievance of the appellant is that without conducting any enquiry on the supplier namely, the fourth respondent and without effecting any recovery from the fourth respondent, the first respondent was not justified in proceeding against the appellant. It is seen that a scrutiny of the return submitted by the appellant was made under Sec. 61 of the Act for the Financial Year 2017-18 which was followed by a notice dtd. 3/8/2022 stating that certain discrepancies were noticed. The appellant had submitted their reply dtd. 24/8/2022. Thereafter the appellant was served with the show-cause notice dtd. 6/12/2022 proposing a demand as to the excess ITC claimed by the appellant for the Financial Year 2017-18 on the basis of the difference of the amount of ITC in Form GSTR-2A and Form GSTR-3B with respect to the purchase transaction made by the appellant with the fourth respondent. The appellant filed detailed replies on 6/1/2023 and 11/1/2023, denying the allegations made in the show-cause notice and among other things submitted that the appellant had made payment of tax to the fourth respondent arising from the transaction and thereafter availed ITC on the said purchase. The show-cause notice was adjudicated and by order dtd. 20/2/2023 a demand for payment of tax of Rs.6,50,511.00 along with applicable interest and penalty was confirmed under Sec. 73(10) of the Act. Challenging the said order, the appellant had filed the writ petition. The learned Single Bench by the impugned order disposed of the writ petition by directing the appellant to prefer a statutory appeal before the appellate authority after complying with the requisite formalities and the appellate authority was directed to dispose of the appeal without rejecting the same on the ground of limitation. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) We have heard Mr. Ankit Kanodia assisted by Ms. Megha Agarwal and Mr. Jitesh Sah, learned Advocates for the appellant and Mr. T.M. Siddique, learned Government Counsel for the respondent.

(3.) For a dealer to be eligible to avail credit of any input tax, the conditions prescribed in Sec. 16 (2) of the Act have to be fulfilled. Sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 16 commences with a non-obstante clause stating that notwithstanding anything contained in Sec. 16 no registered person shall be entitled to credit of any input tax in respect of any supply of goods or services or both to him unless-