9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 259 - HC - GSTCancellation of registration of petitioner - petitioner is that at the time of purchase of goods/stocks, the registration of the selling dealer was valid - non-constitution of CoC - HELD THAT - Matter requires consideration. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of State-respondents. He prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Petitioner shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit.
Issues:
Challenge to order of Appellate Authority under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for A.Y. 2018-19. Analysis: The High Court entertained a petition against the order dated 28.11.2020 passed by the Appellate Authority in Appeal No.80 of 2019 related to proceedings under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the period of October, 2018 (A.Y. 2018-19). As no Tribunal had been constituted yet, the court decided to consider the petition at that stage. The petitioner's counsel argued that the genuineness of the transaction should not be affected by the subsequent cancellation of the selling dealer's registration, as it was valid at the time of purchase of goods/stocks. This argument raised the question of the impact of registration status on the validity of transactions under consideration. Regarding the deposit of disputed tax liability, the counsel mentioned that 10% had already been deposited as per Section 107(6) of the Act. It was stated that upon depositing 20% of the remaining tax amount, the appeal before the Tribunal (when constituted) would be maintainable. The petitioner expressed willingness to make this deposit. The Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State-respondents accepted the notice and was granted four weeks to file a counter affidavit. The petitioner was given two weeks thereafter to file a rejoinder affidavit. The court directed that, in the interim, the balance recovery would be stayed if the petitioner deposited 20% of the disputed tax amount. This decision aimed to provide temporary relief pending further proceedings.
|
