Red Coin Paper Product VS Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax

In this writ application, the petitioner, a partnership firm, seeks the court to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate order directing the respondent authority to pass an order in FORM GST-PMT-03 as per Rule 86(4) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, in conjunction with Circular No. 59/33/2018. Ms. Maithili Mehta, the learned Assistant Government Pleader (AGP), has waived service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.

Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned Assistant Government Pleader (AGP), waived the service of notice for the respondent. The writ application by the applicant, a partnership firm, seeks the following main reliefs:

1. Issuance of a writ of mandamus or any appropriate order to the respondent authority to pass an order in FORM GST-PMT-03, as per Rule 86(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Circular No. 59/33/2018-GST, to re-credit the rejected amount in the electronic credit ledger for the tax period of May 2018.

2. Issuance of a writ of mandamus or any appropriate order to the respondent authority to pass an order in FORM GST-PMT-03, as per Rule 86(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Circular No. 59/33/2018-GST, to re-credit the rejected amount in the electronic credit ledger for the tax period of June 2018.

In this writ application, the writ applicant, a partnership firm engaged in the manufacturing and trading of paper products, seeks specific reliefs concerning the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. The application was presented with Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned Additional Government Pleader (AGP), who waived the service of notice of rule for the respondent.

The writ applicant requests the court to issue a writ of mandamus or another appropriate order directing the respondent authority to re-credit the rejected amount in the electronic credit ledger for the tax periods of May, June, and July 2018. The reliefs sought are based on Rule 86(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, in conjunction with Circular No. 59/33/2018-GST.

Specifically, the applicant asks for the following:

1. To direct the respondent authority to pass an order in FORM GST-PMT-03 for the tax period of May 2018, re-crediting the rejected amount to the electronic credit ledger.

2. To issue a similar direction for the tax period of June 2018.

3. To extend the directive to the tax period of July 2018 as well.

The firm has registered under section 25 of the CGST Act and seeks to resolve the issue concerning the rejected credit amounts in the specified periods. The matter centers on compliance with GST provisions and the rectification of the electronic credit ledger for the mentioned tax periods.

In the writ application presented by Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned Assistant Government Pleader (AGP) who waived the service of notice on behalf of the respondent, the writ applicant, a partnership firm involved in the manufacturing and trading of paper products, seeks judicial intervention to address a grievance regarding the non-compliance of the respondent authority with specific provisions of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). The applicant requests the court to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate order to compel the respondent to pass orders in FORM GST-PMT-03, as per Rule 86(4) of the CGST Rules, 2017, for the re-crediting of the rejected amount in the electronic credit ledger for the tax periods of May, June, and July 2018.

The crux of the writ applicant’s grievance is the alleged inaction by the respondent authority in not re-crediting the input tax credit amount to the electronic credit ledger following the rejection of the refund claims for the specified periods. The applicant argues that this inaction not only fails to comply with the stipulated legal provisions but also infringes upon the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, which ensures the freedom to carry on any occupation, trade, or business.

The writ applicant contends that the failure to pass the necessary orders in FORM GST-PMT-03 constitutes a denial of their statutory rights and adversely impacts their business operations by obstructing the flow of credit needed for their financial and operational processes. The request for judicial intervention is aimed at compelling the respondent authority to adhere to the legal requirements and rectify the situation by ensuring that the rejected input tax credit is duly re-credited to the applicant’s electronic credit ledger.

The matter is pending further consideration by the court, which will determine the appropriate relief and directives to be issued to address the grievances raised by the writ applicant.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: