The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the acceptance of belated returns of the assessee by the department along with the late fee is not a valid ground to exonerate the assessee from the time limit for Input Tax Credit (ITC) claim under Section 16(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax (APGST) Act and Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.
The court also upheld the validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act stating that the time limit for claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) does not violate constitutional provisions.
The case revolved around the petitioner’s challenge to Section 16(4) of the APGST and CGST Acts, which specifies a time limit for claiming ITC. The petitioner contended that this provision violated their rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 300-A of the Indian Constitution.
The petitioner, Thirumalakonda Plywoods represented by Sri Rama Krishna Kumar Potturi argued that the acceptance of their belated Form GSTR-3B return for March 2020, filed with a late fee, should exempt them from the time limit for claiming ITC as per Section 16(4) of the CGST Act as it implies exoneration for any delay in claiming ITC beyond the time specified in the Section.
The court clarified that the acceptance of belated returns with a late fee does not automatically exempt the assessee from the time limit for ITC claims, as specified in Section 16(4) of the CGST Act.
The petitioner had also raised concerns about the validity of a government notification extending return filing time due to the COVID-19 pandemic, alleging arbitrary discrimination. However, the court found no merit in this argument, stating that other traders facing similar circumstances had managed to file their returns on time and therefore the petitioner should not receive special treatment.
The court ruled that the contentions raised by the petitioner lacked force. The court found that the Assessment Order passed by the authorities followed due process, and the objections raised by the petitioner were rejected after thorough consideration.
The bench emphasised that the acceptance of late returns does not exempt the petitioner from the requirements of Section 16(4) and the time limits for claiming ITC are well within the legislative framework. The court thus upholds the validity of the assessment order passed by the authorities.
In conclusion, the division bench comprising Justice U. Durga Prasad Rao and Justice T. Mallikarjuna Rao dismissed the writ petition filed by Thirumalakonda Plywoods against the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and others.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
