HEC India LLP VS Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise

The petitioner, an authorized signatory of the Hyundai Motor Group, established in November 2006, providing engineering and construction services, has filed a writ petition seeking relief to direct the respondents to allow debiting a sum of Rs. 47,30,457/- from its electronic credit ledger.

The issue at hand revolves around the Department’s decision to block the petitioner’s Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to Rs. 47,30,457/-. This blocking is based on the contention that there is a discrepancy between the ITC claimed by the petitioner in their GSTR3B and the ITC reflected in the GSTR2A for the fiscal years 2017-18 and 2018-19. Additionally, it is proposed that Rs. 13,41,543/- each under CGST and SGST be reversed due to this mismatch.

Furthermore, the show cause notice alleges that the petitioner availed ITC for import purchases based on a bill. This discrepancy has led to the blocking and proposed reversal of the mentioned ITC amount.

In response, the petitioner seeks judicial intervention through this writ petition to challenge the decision of the Department. They argue that the blocking and proposed reversal of ITC are unjustified and arbitrary. The petitioner contends that they are entitled to claim the ITC in question and that the alleged discrepancies are either non-existent or can be adequately explained.

The relief sought by the petitioner is clear: they request the court to direct the respondents to permit debiting the specified sum from their electronic credit ledger. This action would enable the petitioner to utilize the blocked ITC for their business operations.

In summary, the case revolves around the dispute over Input Tax Credit between the petitioner and the Department. The petitioner contends that they are entitled to the disputed ITC and seeks judicial intervention to reverse the decision to block and propose reversal of the credit amount.

The petitioner, an authorized signatory of the Hyundai Motor Group, established in November 2006, seeks relief in a writ petition to permit the debiting of Rs. 47,30,457 from its electronic credit ledger. This amount represents Input Tax Credit (ITC) blocked by the Department, with Rs. 13,41,543 each proposed to be reversed for CGST and SGST. The blocking stems from discrepancies between ITC claimed in GSTR3B and that reflected in GSTR2A for the periods 2017-18 and 2018-19. Additionally, the Department alleges that the petitioner availed ITC for import purchases without their GSTIN number on the Bill of Lading.

The petitioner submitted a detailed representation on June 22, 2021, explaining the purported error and requesting withdrawal of the blocking, but received no response from the authorities. A show cause notice issued on December 17, 2020, by the second respondent raised concerns about non-reversal of ITC not reflected in GSTR2A, amounting to Rs. 13,41,543 each for CGST and SGST. The notice cited Section 73(1) of the CGST Act, 2017/TNGST Act, 2017, indicating liability for reversal of wrongly taken ITC.

The matter is under adjudication before the competent authority, with the petitioner having submitted a representation to withdraw the blocking of ITC. The petition underscores the need for the authorities to consider all relevant aspects in their decision-making process.

The writ petition seeks relief for the petitioner to be allowed to debit a sum of Rs. 47,30,457/- from its electronic credit ledger. The petitioner, an authorized signatory of the Hyundai Motor Group, providing engineering and construction services since November 2006, had its Input Tax Credit (ITC) blocked by the Department for the mentioned amount. The Department proposed to reverse Rs. 13,41,543/- each of CGST and SGST, citing a mismatch between the ITC claimed by the petitioner in their GSTR3B and the ITC reflected in the GSTR2A for the period 2017-18 and 2018-19. Additionally, a show cause notice claimed that the petitioner availed ITC for import purchases without their GSTIN number mentioned in the Bill of Landing.

The petitioner submitted a detailed representation to the first respondent on June 22, 2021, explaining why the blocking of ITC was erroneous and requested its withdrawal, but received no response. A show cause notice was issued by the second respondent on December 17, 2020, addressing non-reversal of input tax credit not reflected in GSTR2A, with a proposed reversal amount identical to the blocked ITC.

The issue raised in the petition is under adjudication before the competent authority. The petitioner has also submitted a representation to withdraw the blocking of ITC. Considering these factors, the competent authorities must assess the situation, and the court cannot intervene in ongoing proceedings. Intermittent intervention by the High Courts in such cases may prejudice either party. The petitioner claims the blocking of ITC is erroneous, while the show cause notice contains allegations against them. These aspects necessitate adjudication based on documents and evidence. Therefore, the petitioner has the liberty to address their grievances before the competent authorities, and the court cannot issue the requested direction as the proceedings are ongoing. The authorities are instructed to conclude the proceedings expeditiously.

In conclusion, the writ petition is disposed of with the above observations, with no costs incurred. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: