Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040007152024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/223/2024 Langkung Ragia Son of Langkung Asuk, proprietor of M/s Ragia Ku Enterprise, having their business at Narba Colony, ESS Sector, Ganga, Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh 791113 VERSUS The Union of India and 5 Ors represented by the Secretary, Govt of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi 110001 2:The Commissioner CGST adn CX Age: 0 Occupation : Itanagar Division Sector A Naharlagun Arunachal Pradesh 791110 3:The Assistant Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Central Goods and Service Tax Itanagar Division Sector A Naharlagun Arunachal Pradesh 791110 4:The Superintendent (Anti Evasion) Age: 0 Occupation : O/o Commissioner CGST and CX Itanagar Page No.# 2/5 Sector A Naharlagun Arunachal Pradesh 791110 5:The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs Age: 0 Occupation : 1st Floor Tower NBCC Plaza 1 Sector 5 PushpVihar New Delhi 110017 6:The Chairperson Age: 0 Occupation : Goods and Services Tax Council 5th Floor Tower II Jeevan Bharti Building Janapath Road Connaught Place New Delhi 11000 Advocate for the Petitioner : Dakjum Riba, Advocate for the Respondent : Marto Kato, DSGI BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER Date : 11.03.2025 Heard Ms. D. Riba, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Kato, learned Dy.S.G.I. appearing for respondent No 1 and Mr. M. K. Boro, learned standing counsel for the CGST appearing for respondents No. 2 to 6. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the Demand-cum- Page No.# 3/5 Show Cause Notice dated 21.11.2023 (Annexure-D) by which the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why the amount of RGST, CGST and SGST amounting in aggregate to Rs 1,88,24,200.00 availed and utilised for the tax period of March, 2019 after 20.10.2019 should not be demanded and recovered under Section 73 (1) of the CGST Act. Although the petitioner replied to the Show Cause Notice, the Assistant Commissioner, CGST and CX Itanagar Division vide impugned order dated 22.04.2024, confirmed the demand notice and imposed a penalty of Rs 18,82,420/- on the petitioner in terms of Section 73(9) read with Section 122(2)(a) of CGST Act, 2017. Aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although entitlement to take input tax relief in respect of any invoice or debit note, for supply of goods or services, has to be made before the 30th day of November following the end of the Financial Year to which such invoice or debit note pertains to, but Section 16 of the GST Act has been amended by the Finance Act, 2024, which was published in the Gazette of India on 16.08.2024, by which the time prescribed has been extended to 30th day of November 2021. Such being the position, the petitioner is entitled to avail the benefit of the input tax relief. She, therefore, submits that the impugned Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice and the orders in Page No.# 4/5 original should be set aside. 4. The learned counsel has also submitted that in a case of similar nature, a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.09.2024, passed in WP(C) No. 470 (AP)/2022, taking into account the amendment of Section 16 of the CGST Act, had set aside the orders in original which was challenged in that case and the responding authorities were directed to consider and pass an appropriate order taking into consideration Sub-Section (5) of Section 16 of the CGST Act, 2017 vide amendment to the Finance Act, 2024, dated 16.08.2024. She, therefore, submits that a similar order may be passed in the instant case. 5. Mr. Boro, learned standing counsel for the CGST fairly submits that in view of the amendment brought in by the Finance Act, the impugned Show Cause Notice and the orders in original cannot be sustained. 6. Mr. M. Kato, learned Dy.S.G.I. submits that although the respondent No. 1 has nothing much to say in the matter, but in view of the amendment brought in by the Finance Act, he agrees that the impugned Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice and the order in original cannot be sustained. 7. Upon hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the materials available on record and taking into account the amendment brought in by the Finance Act as stated herein above, Page No.# 5/5 the impugned Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice, dated 21.11.2023 and the order in original, dated 22.04.2024 are hereby set aside. The respondent authorities are further directed to consider and pass appropriate order by taking into account the provisions of Sub-Section (5) of Section 16 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the amendment to the Finance Act, 2024 8. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant