9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1064X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he dealers, whom the assessing authority claimed to have been examined to show that the petitioner has purchased goods from the dealers who are non-existing/fictitious - Since this material forms part of the impugned order, we are of the view that the assessing authority ought to have furnished the said material enabling the petitioner to make a representation or produce any material contra to the same, to substantiate his plea. Non-furnishing of the same, would be violation of principles of natural justice. Ergo, the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 in Form DRC-07, dated 20.06.2022, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the assessing authority - the provisional attachment order passed by respondent No.2 in Form GST DRC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ST/SGST Act, 2017 and in violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and pass 3. As seen from the record, the petitioner has been regularly filing returns and paying resultant tax in terms of Section 16 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It is submitted that respondent No.1, in pursuance of inspection conducted in the business premises of the petitioner, issued notice in GST DRC-01A, dated 31.01.2022, ascertaining an amount of Rs.11,15,41,133/- towards the tax payable by the petitioner. Detailed objections came to be filed requesting respondent No.1 to drop the proposed action. Instead of considering the objections and the elaborate documentary evidence f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ged by respondent No.1, there was no response from him either rejecting or restricting the time sought for by the petitioner. But the impugned order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 20.06.2022, came to be passed stating that the petitioner herein did not respond to the revised notice issued in GST DRC-01, dated 30.05.2022. It is also to be noted here that respondent No.2 provisionally attached the bank account of the petitioner under Section 83 of the A.P.GST Act vide order, dated 07.05.2022. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. Reiterating the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, Sri Bhaskar Reddy Vemireddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, would contend that the order of assessment is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , according to the assessing authority, did not pass, and also the names of the owners of the vehicles, who have not hired their vehicles to the petitioner, are not furnished. Since this material forms part of the impugned order, we are of the view that the assessing authority ought to have furnished the said material enabling the petitioner to make a representation or produce any material contra to the same, to substantiate his plea. Non-furnishing of the same, in our view, would be violation of principles of natural justice. 7. Ergo, the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 in Form DRC-07, dated 20.06.2022, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the assessing authority. It is made clear that the petitioner herein shall mak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
