9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring reference C.No.IV/16/30/2019-Tech-III from the second respondent to the third respondent bank will stand set aside. The second respondent shall consider all the points raised in writ petitioner's reply dated 29.03.2019, more particularly the annexed working sheet, pass an order in a manner known to law and communicate the same to the writ petitioner under due acknowledgement within one week therefrom. Petition disposed off. - W.P.No.15624 of 2019 And W.M.P.Nos.15518, 15520 and 15523 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 13-6-2019 - Mr. Justice M. Sundar For the Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthuvenkataraman For the Respondents : Mr.V.Sundareswaran Senior Panel Counsel ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t 32 of 2018)', hereinafter 'CGST' for brevity is the statute out of which the instant writ petition arises; c) The writ petitioner is taking 'Input Tax Credit' (ITC) as and when applicable based on the invoices and other documents as described under law; d) The writ petitioner is also filing returns on a monthly basis; e) It is the writ petitioner's case that it is entitled and eligible to utilize input tax credit availed towards the tax and writ petitioner is liable to pay output tax liability; f) It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner was unable to pay their entire taxes due in cash on the due date and therefore, the writ petitioner became ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t petitioner, Office of the Superintendent of Central Tax sent a communication calling upon the writ petitioner to pay ₹ 1,00,91,755/-. This was followed by a communication dated 23.05.2019 bearing reference C.No.IV/16/30/2019-Tech-III from the second respondent to the third respondent banker inter alia calling upon the third respondent bank to make payment in pursuance of the aforesaid demand. 10. It is not in dispute that the third respondent bank is writ petitioner's banker and writ petitioner's bank account is with the third respondent bank. To be noted, this communication dated 23.05.2019 bearing reference C.No.IV/16/30/2019-Tech-III (hereinafter be referred to as 'impugned communic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adverting to the aforesaid order, learned Revenue counsel contended that imposition of interest under Section 50 is automatic. Learned revenue counsel also drew the attention of this Court to subsection (12) of Section 75 of CGST Act and contended that in cases of selfassessed tax, the moment the amount of tax remains unpaid, levy of interest is automatic and the same has to be paid. A perusal of Section 75 of CGST Act reveals that there is a non-obstante clause therein, qua preceding sections 73 and 74 which deal with determination of short payment, non-payment etc., 14. However, the aforesaid communication dated 22.05.2019 from the Office of the Superintendent of Central Tax is the basis for the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that if the respondents are called upon to send a reply explaining the aforesaid two aspects and if it is not in favour of the writ petitioner assessee, the writ petitioner assessee will avail alternate remedy under Section 107 of CGST act. 16. In the light of narrative thus far, the following order is passed: a) Writ petitioner undertakes to pay the admitted liability of ₹ 229,014,673/- (as admitted in petitioner's aforementioned letter dated 29.03.2019 to the Department within one week from today i.e., on or before 20.06.2019). b) On payment of aforesaid amount on or before 20.06.2019, the impugned communication dated 23.05.2019 bearing reference C.No.IV/16/30/2019-Tech-III ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
