9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (2) TMI 658 - HC - GSTValidity of notification granted second extension of time to issue show cause notice under Section 73(10) of the U.P. GST Act, 2020 - Validity of the Notification No. 09/2023 dated 31.3.2023 and Notification No. 515/SI-2-23-9(47)/17-T.C215-U.P. Act- 1-2017-Order-(273/2023) dated 24.4.2023 - time limitation - HELD THAT - In any case, no parallel notification has been issued under the UP GST Act, 2017. All respondents are represented. They pray for and are granted six weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Petitioner shall have two weeks, thereafter, to file rejoinder affidavit - In view of interim order granted in the lead case, proceedings in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 21.12.2023 may go on but no final order may be passed except with leave of the Court.
Issues involved: Validity of notifications u/s 73(10) of the U.P. GST Act, 2020 and issuance of notification under the Central GST Act, 2017 without prior approval of the GST council.
Validity of Notification u/s 73(10) of the U.P. GST Act, 2020: In the connected Writ Tax No.1393 of 2023, challenge was raised regarding the validity of Notification No. 09/2023 dated 31.3.2023 and Notification No. 515/SI-2-23-9(47)/17-T.C215-U.P. Act-1-2017-Order-(273/2023) dated 24.4.2023. It was argued that the second extension of time to issue show cause notice u/s 73(10) of the U.P. GST Act, 2020 was not justified, making the show cause notice dated 30.9.2023 time-barred. Reference was made to an interim order in a similar Writ Petition, highlighting the issue of timeliness. Issuance of Notification under the Central GST Act, 2017: It was contended in the present case that the impugned notification No.56 of 2023 dated 28th December, 2023, was issued solely under the Central GST Act, 2017, without prior approval of the GST council. Moreover, no corresponding notification was issued under the UP GST Act, 2017. Considering the arguments presented and the facts outlined, the Court deemed the matter worthy of further consideration. Additional Details: All respondents were present and were granted six weeks to file a counter affidavit, with the petitioner given two weeks thereafter to file a rejoinder affidavit. The Court directed the listing of the case with the name of Sri Gopal Verma as counsel for the Union of India. Notably, due to an interim order in the lead case, proceedings based on the impugned notice dated 21.12.2023 were allowed to continue, but no final order could be issued without the Court's permission.
|
