9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the appellant for 38,647/- the same as determined by the A.A. However, the appellant explained that after adjusting eligible ITC of 25,080/-, they have paid the remaining tax liability of 13,568/- on 28-12-2017. This fact could not be verified by the assessing authority, because the AA has not correctly scrutinized the appellant contentions and one sidedly construed the under declared tax even though the appellant has established that they have duly discharged the net tax payable for the month of October, 2017. The facts evidence adduced by the appellant with reference to balance liable tax obviously suggest that the determination of under declaration by AA is lacking certainty and authenticity. On the other hand, the appellant has s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g 1. 25-3-2019 23-4-2019 Attended 2. 17-7-2019 1-8-2019 Not Attended 3. 7-8-2019 6-9-2019 Not Attended 4. 19-9-2019 (final) 14-10-2019 Attended 3. Sri N. Venu Gopala Rao, Authorized Representative of the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'A.R.') has appeared finally on 14-10-2019 for arguing the case. Finally, the appeal was heard by the Appellate Authority. Statement of facts : 4. The appellant M/s. Sri Kali Krishna Industries (Chinaveeranna Golkonda), 20-1026, Industrial Area Road, Dowlaishwaram, East Godavari District on the rolls Assistant Commissioner (ST), Alcot Gardens, Kakinada Division. 5. The assessing authority has caused scrutiny of GST returns of the appellant for the tax period from July, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payable 13,567 GST paid 13,568 Thus, after adjusting the GST ITC of ₹ 25,080/-, we have made payment of remaining tax due of ₹ 13,568/-, but without causing verification of these records, the assessing authority has determined total tax liability basing on the difference between GSTR-1 & GSTR-3B turnovers. We request to examine the ITC eligible to us in the month of 10/2017 and tax paid by us on 28-12-2017 after which the levied tax through the impugned order would have to be set aside. It is respectfully submitted that for these grounds and other grounds to be submitted at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the respectable Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Vijayawada may be pleased to consider the above facts and leg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he AA has unilaterally determined under declared tax merely basing on mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. 14. The appellant finally pleaded that since they have discharged the liable tax for the month of October, 2017, the supposed under declared tax arrived through mismatch reports, is not factual and requested to set aside such levy by annulling the assessment order and prayed for appeal orders in their favour. Issues for Adjudication : (1) Whether the appellant contention that they have discharged the actual net tax liability for the month of October, 2017, hence the suppression of tax arrived through mismatch report is not factual and correct, has been substantiated with logical explanation and dependable evidence or not? Anal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ober, 2017. It is pertinent here to observe that mismatch reports is indicative in nature, but cannot be seen as final to conceive any suppression of turnover/tax. The AA ought to have examined the appellant contentions submitted in response to the show cause notice, which the AA failed to do so. Hence, the determined under declared tax liability by AA, cannot be upheld as bona fide. Therefore, the tax levied basing on mismatch reports is annulled & the appellant contentions are found sustainable with reference to rational arguments and corroborative evidence. Thus, the appeal on this aspect is allowed and the tax so levied is annulled.
18. In the end, the assessment is annulled on the levy made by the assessing authority. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
