HC Remanded Matter as ITC Was Denied Without Indicating Documents to Be Disclosed by Assessee

Case Details: Shiva Chemicals v. Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, Jorasanko and Jorabagan Charge - [2024] 165 taxmann.com 13 (Calcutta)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.
• Ms Sutapa Roy Chowdhury, Abhijat Das & Ms Aratrika Roy for the Petitioner. 
• Anirban Ray, Ld. GP, T.M. Siddiqui, Tanoy Chakraborty & Saptak Sanyal for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was issued show cause notice for availing and utilizing inadmissible Input Tax Credit (ITC) and the adjudication order was passed. It filed appeal but the Appellate Authority rejected the appeal by holding that the petitioner failed to produce transport and other documents. It filed writ petition against the rejection of appeal and contended that it had produced all relevant documents.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the Appellate Authority had passed the order without indicating the documents required to be disclosed by the petitioner. The Court further noted that the petitioner had discharged its initial burden of proof by placing e-way bills, tax invoices, bank statements and Form GSTR-2A. However, the Appellate Authority had returned finding that the petitioner was not eligible for ITC in absence of transport and other documents.

Therefore, the Court held that the impugned order suffered from non-application of mind and was perverse as finding returned by Appellate Authority appeared to be verbatim reproduction of observations made by Adjudicating Authority. Thus, the Court directed the Appellate Authority to reconsider the matter.