9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 399 - HC - GSTValidity of third notice issued by respondent No.2 under the provisions of Section 73 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - From a perusal of the documents, it appears that on 21.09.2021, the first show cause notice was issued and thereafter, on 21.02.2022, the second show cause notice was issued and both the proceedings were dropped by respondents No.3 4 vide order dated 27.04.2022 and 13.06.2022 respectively. It is categorically stated in the reply of the State that proceedings were dropped on the ground that show cause notice was issued and respondents No.1 2 had taken cognizance of the matter on 27.08.2021 though it is not specifically stated in the order dated 13.06.2022 that a third show cause notice has been issued by respondent No.2 according to the provisions of Section 73 of the GST Act. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has a remedy to file reply to the show cause notice before the respondent authorities, who have issued the show cause notice, also considering that present is not a case where the principle of natural justice of the petitioner has been violated or the proceedings are without jurisdiction, in the considered opinion of this Court, respondents No. 2 3 have the authority of law to issue such show cause notice according to the provisions of Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017. Hence, no exceptional case is made out for interference. Petition dismissed.
Issues involved:
The petitioner challenged a notice issued under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The key issues were the repeated issuance of show cause notices by different tax authorities and the legality of the third show cause notice. Issue 1: Repeated issuance of show cause notices The petitioner, a Public Sector Undertaking, received multiple show cause notices regarding GST liability on CG Development Cess and CG Environment Cess under Reverse Charge Mechanism. The State Tax Authorities issued the first two notices, which were subsequently dropped. The third notice was issued by the Central Tax Authorities, leading to the current challenge. Details for Issue 1: - The petitioner argued that issuing multiple notices for the same cause of action was unjustified, citing a Supreme Court judgment. - The respondents justified the third notice by claiming that earlier enquiries were not conducted properly, necessitating a fresh notice. - The Court noted the sequence of events and reasons for dropping the previous notices, ultimately ruling that the authorities had the legal authority to issue the third notice. Issue 2: Legality of the third show cause notice The petitioner contended that the third show cause notice was unwarranted and violated principles of natural justice. The respondents argued that the notice was valid, emphasizing the petitioner's right to respond and the authority of the tax authorities to issue such notices under the GST Act. Details for Issue 2: - The Court examined the grounds for issuing the third notice, clarifying that it was based on new information from investigations. - It was established that the petitioner had the opportunity to respond to the notice and that the notice was within the jurisdiction of the tax authorities. - The Court concluded that no exceptional circumstances warranted interference, leading to the dismissal of the petition. This judgment addressed the concerns raised by the petitioner regarding the repeated issuance of show cause notices and the legality of the third notice under the GST Act. The Court upheld the authority of the tax authorities to issue such notices and emphasized the petitioner's right to respond in the ongoing proceedings.
|
