GST – New Delhi High Court: The instructions that issuing SCN and creating demand should be completed before unblocking the ITC notwithstanding that the period of one year has elapsed after the blocking of the ITC is contrary to the GST provisions; ECrL blocked without giving any reason is not valid – Writ petition allowed [Order attached]

Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
13-Mar-2023 15:20:08
Order Date – 07 March 2023
Parties: M/s Parity Infotech Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi & ors
Facts –
- The Petitioner, M/s Parity Infotech Solutions Pvt Ltd, has received an e-mail on 26.11.2020 stating that the balance in ECL has been blocked by the sales tax officer class II. However, no reasons for blocking were reflected on the portal. The petitioner sent e-mails but no satisfactory reply was received.
- On 28.02.2022 issued a show cause notice calling upon the petitioner to furnish a response along with supporting documents in support of its claim. Although the notice also stated that the petitioner could appear before the concerned officer, however, the column against the entry date of personal hearing and time of personal hearing, was entered as ‘NA’.
- A few days later, on 30.03.2022, respondent issued the impugned order under Section 74 of the “GST Act, 2017” calling upon the petitioner to pay an amount of ₹27,88,200/- and the same has been debited from petitioner’s ECL.
Issue –
- Whether blocking of ITC is in order?
Order –
- The Divisional Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that in terms of Rule 86A of the Rules, it is necessary for the concerned officer i.e., Commissioner or an officer authorized by him not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner, to record the reasons for blocking the ITC in writing.
- The respondents had no material to form any opinion that the ITC had been availed wrongly on account of any fraud or any wilful-misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax. The impugned show cause notice is not in conformity with the provisions of Section 74 of the CGST Act and is, thus, without authority of law.
- It is also clear from a plain reading of the impugned instructions that it suggests that the exercise of issuing a show cause notice and creating a demand should be completed before unblocking the ITC notwithstanding that the period of one year has elapsed after the blocking of the ITC. This is contrary to the express provisions of Rule 86A(3) of the Rules.
- Hence the impugned show cause notice and the impugned order are set aside. The respondents are directed to forthwith restore the ITC appropriated pursuant to the demand created by the impugned order, to the ECL of the petitioner.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation