Writ Petition not maintainable when proceedings dependent upon Adequacy of evidence in support of actual purchase and delivery of goods: Madras HC [Read Order]
Writ Petition not Maintainable when Proceedings Dependent upon Adequacy of Evidence in Support of Actual Purchase and Delivery of Goods, rules Madras HC
Writ Petition – Madras High Court – Delivery of Goods – TAXSCAN
Writ Petition – Madras High Court – Delivery of Goods – TAXSCAN
In a significant ruling the Madras High Court observed that the writ petition is not maintainable when proceedings dependent upon adequacy of evidence in support of actual purchase and delivery of goods.
The petitioner assailed an order by which input tax credit was refused on the basis that the petitioner availed of such credit on the basis of supplies from a non-existent supplier.
The petitioner stated that a show cause notice was received from the respondent calling upon the petitioner to show cause with regard to the purchase of goods from M/s. Siba Auto Private Limited. By reply, the petitioner asserted that the supply was genuine and submitted documents such as purchase invoices, bank statements, lorry receipts and E-way bills.
In spite of submitting such documents, the petitioner stated that the impugned order was issued rejecting the claim for input tax credit on the grounds that gate passes were not submitted and that the supplier could not be traced at the registered place of business in Tamil Nadu.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the supplier is still active and functioning at the address Consequently, the petitioner states that it is possible for the respondent to verify the details of such supplier from the GST common web portal.
The Government Advocate submitted that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on the basis of an inspection carried out at the premises of the registered supplier in Tamil Nadu. In particular, it is submitted that the registered supplier was found to be not functioning at the relevant premises. Since disputed questions of fact arise, the counsel submitted that the appropriate forum for adjudication is the statutory appellate authority.
A Single Bench of Justice SenthilKumar Ramamoorthy observed that “The adjudication of this dispute hinges on the adequacy of evidence in support of the actual purchase and delivery of the goods to the petitioner. Such disputes cannot be conveniently addressed in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, W.P.No.198 of 2024 is dismissed without any order as to costs by leaving it open to the petitioner to avail of the statutory remedy. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.”
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
