Case Details: Tvl. Shivam Steels v. Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC) - [2024] 164 taxmann.com 156 (Madras)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.
- G. Natarajan for the Petitioner.
- C. Harsha Raj, AGP (T) for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner received a show cause notice calling upon it to show cause with regard to reversal of ITC in respect of credit notes issued by supplier. It submitted that the value of supply would not include a discount only if conditions prescribed in Section 15(3) were satisfied. However, the department rejected the reply and passed order to reverse ITC. The petitioner filed writ petition against the order and contended that in impugned order, discount offered by supplier was erroneously construed as service provided by purchaser to supplier.
High Court Held
The Honorable High Court noted that the assessing officer while passing order concluded that taxable person was providing a service to supplier while taking benefit of discount by facilitating an increase in volume of such supplier. The Court held that the conclusion was ex facie erroneous and contrary to fundamental tenets of GST law. Therefore, it was held that the impugned order was to be set aside only in so far relating to reversal of ITC for volume of credit notes issued by supplier and matter was to be remanded for reconsideration by original authority.
The post Matter to Be Remanded Since GST Demand on Discount for Facilitating Increase in Volume of Supplier Was Erroneous | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.