9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 5th November, 2019 including the order dated 4th November, 2019 all passed by Opposite Party No.3 and directs that till the conclusion of the proceeding initiated against the Petitioner by the DGGSTI, no coercive action be taken against the Petitioner by the Opposite Party No.3 - Petition allowed. - W. P. ( C ) No. 158 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 23-3-2021 - THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. S. MURALIDHAR And JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY For the Petitioner : Mr. R. P. Kar, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. R.S. Chimanka, Sr. Standing Counsel for Opposite Parties ORDER 1. The present petition is by the proprietor of M/s. Sai Marketing which is engaged in trading of iron and scraps and has been assigned with GSTIN number. 2. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... request, Opposite Party No.3 proceeded to pass an order on 5th November, 2019 under Section 74 of the OGST Act requiring the Petitioner to pay a sum of ₹ 1,25,57,922.80 towards OGST, CGST, interest, penalty. 6. A separate order was passed by Opposite Party No.3 under Section 74(9) of the OGST Act on the basis of alleged wrong availment of input tax credit (ITC) by the Petitioner and determining the OGST, CGST, interest and penalty to the tune of ₹ 1,25,57,922/-. 7. One of the principal grounds of challenge is based on the D.O. letter dated 5th October, 2018 written by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CGST) to all the GST authorities in which inter alia, it is stated in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 as under: 3. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osite Party No.3 was not aware that the Central Government is seized of the matter. In para 7 of the counter affidavit it is stated as under: 7. That as to the contention in paragraph 1B of the writ petition that the ground of wrong availment of input tax credit by the date of initiation of proceeding under Section 74 by the State Authority had already been in seisin of Central Government Authority, this deponent on instruction from Opposite Party No.3 submits that the said authority on the date of invocation of power under Section 74 was unaware of any proceeding pending adjudication in respect of disputed input tax credit before the Central Government Authority in exercise of power under Section 70. 10. Opposite Party No.2 has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies from proceeding in the matter as long as the Central authorities are seized of it. The only submission by Mr. Chimanka is that the Petitioner should continue to cooperate with the Central GST authorities and appear as and when required by them to do so. 15. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner has already been cooperating and would continue to do so as far as the proceeding initiated by the DGGSTI (Opposite Party No.1) is concerned. 16. It may be noted that the period of enquiry as far as Central tax authority is concerned is from July, 2017 to June, 2018 whereas Opposite Party No.3 has issued a show cause notice specific for March, 2018 and, therefore, there is also an overlapping of the periods. 18. F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
