9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent No.2 could not have initiated the parallel proceedings for recovery of the interest on delayed payment of tax, as the proper officer under the State Act i.e. MPGST Act has already assumed the jurisdiction - Section 50 of the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Be that as it may, if the petitioner has not already filed reply to the show cause notice, it would be ope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Annexure P-22) issued by the respondent No.2 and recovery notices dated 18.09.2019 (Annexure P-14 to P-18) passed by the respondent No.6. Contention of Shri Avinash Zargar, learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the present case, the respondent No.6 - State Tax Officer, SGST, Circle Rewa, Rewa (M.P.) has already initiated the proceedings for recovery of interest on delayed payment unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitted that it has been provided therein that where one proper officer either under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or under the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, has initiated any proceedings on a subject matter, no proceedings shall be initiated by another proper officer under this Act on the same subject matter. The precise argument of the learned counsel therefore is that while ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er submitted that the petitioner has already filed reply to the show cause notice but no decision has been taken by the respondent No.2 on that reply. Be that as it may, if the petitioner has not already filed reply to the show cause notice, it would be open for the petitioner to file reply to the impugned show cause notice raising the aforesaid objection. We direct that the respondent No.2, be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
