M/S. PADMAVATHI ENTERPRISES v. SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX
WP/2555/2023 · 2025-03-19
K Manmadha Rao, R Raghunandan Rao
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4717 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4717 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010037042023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3525] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 2555/2023 Between: M/s. Padmavathi Enterprises ...PETITIONER AND Superintendent Of Central Tax and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. J.N VENKATA SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. B V S CHALAPATI RAO The Court made the following Order:
The petitioner, was assessed to tax, under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the CGST Act”], Andhra Pradesh Goods and Service Tax, 2005 [for short “the APGST Act”] and Integrated Goods and Service Act, 2017 [for short “the IGST Act”], by way of an Order, dated
05.08.2021. During the pendency of the assessment, the petitioner sought to take credit available under the credit ledger. However, this request of the petitioner was rejected by the 1st respondent on the ground that the credit was
2
sought, on 31.10.2019, which was 11 days beyond to maximum time available under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, namely 20.10.2019. 2. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order-in-original No.12 of 2021, dated 05.08.2021, issued by the 1st respondent, had filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent, vide Appeal No.48 of 2021(T)GST. This appeal came to be dismissed, on 13.10.2022, on the ground that the petitioner could not have availed of input tax credit beyond 20.10.2019. 3. Aggrieved by the said order of assessment as well as the order of appeal, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present Writ Petition. 4. Sri J.N. Venkata Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner would relies upon the amended provision of Section 16 wherein sub-section (5) was inserted by a Finance Act, 2024, with effect from 27.09.2024. The relevant provision of Section 16(5) of the CGST Act reads as follows:-
“Section-16(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (4), in respect of an invoice or debit note for supply of goods or services or both pertaining to the Financial Years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21, the registered person shall be entitled to take input tax credit in any return under section 39 which is filed up to the thirtieth day of November, 2021.”
5.
By virtue of this provision, and by virtue of the non-obstante clause available in this provision, the petitioner would be entitled to avail the credit, which was rejected by the respondents 1 & 2, as the credit that is sought to be availed relates to the Financial Years- 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020 & 2020-2021. Apart from this, the petitioner sought to avail the credit, on 31.10.2019, which is within the time of 30.11.2021. 3
6. In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the order of the appeal, dated 13.10.2022 as well as the order of assessment, dated 05.08.2021 and the matter is remanded back to the 1st respondent to pass fresh assessment order keeping in view the provision of Section 16(5) of the CGST Act. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
________________________ DR K MANMADHA RAO, J. BSM
4
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
W.P. No.2555 of 2023 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Date: 19.03.2025
BSM