M/S Royal Traders vs Union Of India
2024 Latest Caselaw 33267 Ker

Kerala High Court

M/S Royal Traders vs Union Of India on 15 November, 2024

Author: P Gopinath

Bench: P Gopinath

                                                       2024:KER:85381

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
    FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 40228 OF 2024

PETITIONER:
           M/S ROYAL TRADERS,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER ZAHEER POKKINARI,
           NANDI BAZAR ROAD, NANDI, KOZHIKODE - 673307.


          BY ADVS.
          K.P.ABDUL AZEES
          T.ARCHANA
          BABY SAHLA B.


RESPONDENTS:
     1     UNION OF INDIA,
           REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
           MINISTRY OF FINANCE, 3RD FLOOR, JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING,
           SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001.

    2     CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,MINISTRY OF
          FINANCE,GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,NORTH BLOCK,
          NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001.

    3     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY (TAXES),SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.

    4     THE STATE TAX OFFICER,
          TAXPAYER SERVICES CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
          DEPARTMENT, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673006.

           SMT THUSHARA JAMES, GP
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 40228 OF 2024

                                    2

                                                         2024:KER:85381
                              JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this Court, being aggrieved by the

fact that petitioner has been denied the benefit of input tax credit on

account of the provisions contained in Sub Section (4) of Section 16 of

the CGST/SGST Acts, for the financial year 2019-20, through Ext.P1

order dated 29.08.2024.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit

that, with the notification of Sub-Section (5) of Section 16 of the

CGST/SGST Acts, the petitioner would now be entitled to the benefit of

input tax credit which has been denied to the petitioner through Ext.P1

order.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and having regard to the

assertion of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that on

account of notification of Sub-Section (5) of Section 16 of the

CGST/SGST Acts, the petitioner will be entitled to input tax credit,

which has been denied to the petitioner by Ext.P1 order, the writ petition

will stand disposed of, setting aside Ext.P1 to the extent that it denied

input tax credit to the petitioner on account of the provisions of Sub WP(C) NO. 40228 OF 2024

2024:KER:85381 Section (4) of Section 16 of the CGST/SGST Acts and directing the

competent authority to pass fresh orders, after taking note of the

provisions contained in Section 16(5) of the CGST/SGST Acts and after

affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of

three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this

judgment.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK WP(C) NO. 40228 OF 2024

2024:KER:85381 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40228/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.

OIO/TPS/KKD/CKLDY/2024/51-STO/2019-20 DATED 29/08/2024