electronic credit ledger be done
Case Title | S.S. Enterprise & anr vs State Tax Officer, New Market Charge & ors. |
Court | Calcutta High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice T.S.Sivagnanam & Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya |
Citation | 2022 (6) GSTPanacea 247 HC Calcutta MAT 498 of 2022 with IA No.CAN 1 of 2022 |
Judgement Date | 07-June-2022 |
Council for Petitioner | Anil Kumar Dugar Rajarshi Chatterjee Gobinda Dey Gobind Jethalia |
Council for Respondent | A.Ray S.Mukherjee Debasish Ghosh Nilotpal Chatterjee |
Section | |
In Favour of | Favour of Assessee |
The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice T.S.Sivagnanam & Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya has held that till final orders are passed, if the credit which was not availed on the date when the blocking was done namely 16.02.2022 is also to be blocked, then it might cause prejudice to the dealer.
FACTS OF THE CASE
Petitioner was file on the ground that the interim order sought for in the writ petition was not granted. The order which has been impugned in the writ petition is an order passed by the respondent authority blocking the electronic credit ledger account of the appellant dealer.
the appellant has been in the business of dealing scrap papers for long 30 years and they are honest tax payers and on account of blocking of their electronic credit ledger account their business activity has been affected and they put to great prejudice
Mr. Dugar would submit that the appellant had submitted a representation on 21.02.2022 requesting the Assistant Commissioner of State Sales Tax, New Market Charge to withdraw the negative blocking of their electronic credit ledger and credit of Rs. 1,27,54,701.00 debited on 16.02.2022. It is submitted that this request has not been considered
electronic credit ledger be done
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, held that till final orders are passed, if the credit which was not availed on the date when the blocking was done namely 16.02.2022 is also to be blocked, then it might cause prejudice to the dealer
electronic credit ledger be done
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
Court is of the view that while declining to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge, we deem it appropriate to direct the concerned respondent to dispose of the representation dated 21.02.2022 by taking note of the legal position and also bearing in mind that unless the appellant, who is a registered dealer, is allowed to carry on business and tax cannot be recovered. We should not be mistaken for saying as if errant dealer should be left scotfree, if there is any illegal arrangement of input credit tax stringent action should be taken.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit: