The Madras High Court directed to approach the statutory appellate authority as the assessee was unable to Claim Input Tax Credit ( ITC ) due to a defect in the return filed. The court refused to entertain the writ petition in light of the statutory remedy available to the petitioner.
Peter Tyres, the petitioner challenged an order by which the petitioner’s claim for input tax credit was rejected. The petitioner asserts that he is a registered person under the GST regime. The petitioner submitted that he is entitled to input tax credit for the period running from 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2022. He further submits that he was unable to claim an input tax credit in view of defects in the form of return provided under the statute.
Mr.Ramesh Kutty, Senior Standing Counsel, accepted notice on behalf of the respondent and submitted that a statutory remedy is provided in respect of the impugned order. He also points out that the impugned order was pronounced after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and that the same is reflected in the order.
It was found that the impugned order takes into account the petitioner’s reply to the show cause notice and it is evident that said order was issued after providing a personal hearing to the petitioner.
The single bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy refused to exercise discretionary jurisdiction and entertain the writ petition in light of the statutory remedy available to the petitioner. The Court directed the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
