- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Rajasthan High Court allows Input Tax Credit to the assessee
Rajasthan High Court allows Input Tax Credit to the assessee
The Goods and Services Tax department was pulled up for the non-availability of the Form on its portal
The Rajasthan High Court recently allowed a petition filed due to the non-availability of Form GST ITC-02A on the Goods and Services Tax (GST) portal. It directed the department to allow the assessee-petitioner Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs.2,58,03,590 on filing the next GSTR-3B return.
The appellant, Pacific Industries Limited had started a new business. Since the GST Form was not available on the department's portal for a period of 30 days from the registration of his new business verticals, the petitioner was denied the opportunity of transferring the unutilized ITC to its new registration, effective from April 2019.
The petitioner claimed that he had uploaded a manual copy in May 2019 and also submitted it personally, but the Deputy Commissioner, CTO Ward, A-Circle Udaipur, did not accept it.
The division bench comprising Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani observed that the counsel representing the respondent (GST department) was not in a position to dispute the fact that the required Form was not available on the department's portal. Therefore, the petitioner could genuinely not fill it.
The court, thus, held, "As a consequence of the admitted factual position, the impugned action whereby, the respondents failed to acknowledge and transfer the ITC to the petitioner pursuant to the registration of its new business unit in accordance with the GST Rules, it is grossly illegal, arbitrary and unjust."
It further said, "The respondents are directed to regularize the ITC in favor of the petitioner as per the entitlement. The petitioner shall be allowed to avail the ITC at the time of the next GSTR-3B return."