Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (12) TMI 706

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... riod of 30 days mandated under the provisions of Section 73(8) of CGST/BGST Act, 2017 was not afforded to the petitioner for making payment due and prior to the expiry of 30 days, the assessing officer proceeded to pass the order, ex parte in nature. The notice dated 15.02.2021 (Annexure-P/4 series) directed the petitioner to file reply on 21st of February, 2021 which was within the period of 30 days. It is the mandate of law that 30 days period has to be afforded to the parties, which was not done in the instant case. Order quashed - Matter restored back.
Honourable The Chief Justice And Honourable Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Madan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. K. N. Singh, ASG, Mr. Vivek Prasad, G .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... en imposed on the petitioner, (iii) For holding that the impugned assessment order dated 24.02.2021 (Annexure- P/1) as also the summary order and the demand DRC-07 dated 24.02.2021 are bad in law in as much as the aforesaid violation to section 73 (8) of the GST Act which prescribes minimum 30 days notice time whereas in present case DRC- 01 (Annexure-P/4) was issued on 15.02.2021 and merely after 9 days of issuance of such notice impugned assessment order dated 24.01.2021 has been issued. (iv) For issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing setting aside the Appellate order dated 28.09.2022 and APL- 02 bearing No. ZD100922022931T dated 30.09.2022 (Annexure-P/3 Series) passed in Appeal Case No. AD100722002538K by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... loaded by the petitioner on its web- portal of GST; as also without delving into the merit of the case; (ix) For holding that it was illegal on the part of Respondent No.7 to rejected the claim of Input and imposed interest worth Rs. 44,68,807/- for the difference of ITC in GSTR 3B vs GSTR 2A in view of the fact that for the amount of difference between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A could have been justified if petitioner was given an opportunity of hearing by the assessing officer. (x) For passing any such other order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." Undisputedly, minimum statutory period of 30 days mandated under the provisions of Section 74(A) of CGST/BGST Act, 2017 was not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates