Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTGST ITC Can’t Be Denied merely For Non-Furnishing Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate...

GST ITC Can’t Be Denied merely For Non-Furnishing Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate In Prescribed Format: Karnataka High Court

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Karnataka High court has held that the Input Tax Credit (ITC) cannot be denied merely for non-furnishing foreign inward remittance certificates in prescribed format.

The bench of  Justice Suraj Govindaraj has observed that where the assessee has the documents, in the statement of objections which had been filed, the assessee had indicated the reconciliation which had been made. Of course, the same was not indicated in the format as desired by the department, which had been communicated to the petitioner. Merely because it was not in terms of the format, the department could not have come to a conclusion that there are no documents which have been furnished when details thereof had already been furnished.

The petitioner/assessee raised the issue whether the petitioner had submitted the required details to the assessing authority and whether those documents were duly considered before passing the order.

The question can be answered in a very short manner in as much as the details though furnished were submitted belatedly on 05.05.2024 when the order was passed on 30.04.2024 and as such, the same could not be considered by the first respondent. However, when an appeal had been filed before the second respondent, these documents were placed on record and it was requested by the petitioner for those documents to be considered. The second respondent has refused to consider the same on the ground that it had not been furnished to the first respondent within time and that the appeal was deleted.

The court has held that the petitioner has been deprived of a valuable right in consideration of the documents which had been placed by the petitioner for consideration before the second respondent, if not before the first respondent. 

Case Details

Case Title: M/S Benayah Solutions Versus The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Case No.:  WRIT PETITION NO. 8477 OF 2025 (T-RES)

Date: 04/07/2025

Counsel For  Petitioner: VINAY.S, AND SMT. MARY SAVITHA

Counsel For Respondent: M.DILIP, ADVOCATE

Read More: Capital Loss Carry Forward Allowed Even When Gains on Grandfathered Investments Are Tax-Exempt: ITAT

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

GST Demand on Money Transfer Services: Delhi High Court Sends Export and S. 74 Disputes to Appellate Authority

The Delhi High Court has directed the assessee to pursue its statutory appeal against...

GST Refund Rejection Quashed After Revised Notice Returned Undelivered: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has set aside the rejection of a ₹3.83 lakh GST...

Customs Can’t Insist on Form-I for India–UK CETA Tariff Claims Supported by Valid Origin Declaration: CBIC

The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has clarified that an importer...

Can Foreign Assets Be Assessed for AY 2018–19 When the First Black Money Act Notice Was Issued in FY 2018–19? Karnataka High Court Says...

The Karnataka High Court has quashed an assessment concerning two properties in Morocco after...

More like this

GST Demand on Money Transfer Services: Delhi High Court Sends Export and S. 74 Disputes to Appellate Authority

The Delhi High Court has directed the assessee to pursue its statutory appeal against...

GST Refund Rejection Quashed After Revised Notice Returned Undelivered: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has set aside the rejection of a ₹3.83 lakh GST...

Customs Can’t Insist on Form-I for India–UK CETA Tariff Claims Supported by Valid Origin Declaration: CBIC

The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has clarified that an importer...