9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 636 - HC - GSTOrder to conduct Special Audit for GST Accounts of the petitioner firm for the period mentioned therein, by appointing a Chartered Accountant for Special Audit under Section 72 a of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 2 e and Section 66 of the CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Having regard to the provisions of Section 66 and Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 vis- -vis the contents of the impugned order dated 16.11.2020 which prima facie does not reflect about consideration of the two aspects mentioned in Section 66 of the CGST Act, 2017, it is provided that the respondent authorities shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner till the returnable date. Issue notice, returnable in 3 three weeks.
Issues involved: Challenge to order for Special Audit u/s 72[a] of Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174[2][e] and Section 66 of CGST Act, 2017.
Summary: The petitioner challenged an order dated 16.11.2020 for Special Audit of GST Accounts by a Chartered Accountant under Section 72[a] of the Finance Act, 1994 and Section 66 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the authority failed to consider the conditions precedent u/s 66 and Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, namely, correctness of value declared and credit availed within normal limits. The petitioner argued that the authority did not apply its mind, making the order arbitrary. Additionally, the appeals against the order were disallowed without a reasoned order, communicated to the petitioner on 01.02.2023. The Chartered Accountant firm appointed for the Special Audit had not yet commenced the audit. In response, the Standing Counsel, GST informed that the Chartered Accountant firm had not initiated the Special Audit. The Court issued notice returnable in three weeks. As the Standing Counsel accepted notices on behalf of all respondents, no formal notices were required. Considering the provisions of Section 66 and Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the lack of reflection of the required aspects in the impugned order, the Court directed that no coercive action be taken against the petitioner until the returnable date.
|
