9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. 2. Heard Mr. Avinash Poddar, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned AGP appearing for the respondent. 3. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 06.04.2022 passed by the competent authority under Section 73 of the GST Act (for short 'the GST Act'). 4. Facts in brief would indicate that the petitioner - a partnership firm is running in the name and style of 'M/s. M Group'. It is the case of the petitioner that it is engaged in the supply of manpower services for installation of fiber optics etc. On 17.07.2021, the petitioner received a notice in Form ASMT-10 under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orked out at Rs. 46,91,684/-. Had an opportunity of hearing been given to the petitioner, it would have satisfied the assessing authority that the order was bad. Essentially it was the case of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in accordance with the provisions of Section 75(4) of the Act the order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as an adverse decision was taken against the petitioner, which was otherwise contemplated but not passed in accordance with the principles of natural justice by giving an opportunity of hearing. 5.1 Mr. Poddar would rely on the decision of the Division Bench of this court in Special Civil Application No. 11332 of 2022. He would rely on para 13 of the decision to indicate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner was liable to pay Rs. 46,85,584/- towards claiming input tax credit. (c) The petitioner was required to file his response on or before 19.12.2021 which the petitioner admittedly did not. The defence of the petitioner is that since one of the partners was engaged in pursuing his remedy for securing anticipatory bail, the petitioner could not respond to the notice. (d) The assessment order was accordingly passed wherein a discrepancy in the figures as referred to hereinabove was noticed. 8.1 Though the order relied upon by Mr. Poddar in Special Civil Application No. 11332 of 2022 indicates that in case there is violation of principles of natural justice and an order is passed without an opportunity of hearing, proceedin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T council which so as to facilitate measures of trade has opined that the time period for filing appeals under Section 107 will be allowed in case such appeals are filed against orders which have been passed on or before 31.03.2023 up to 31.01.2024. The relevant portion of the GST recommendations read as under: B. Measures for facilitation of trade: Amnesty Scheme for filing of appeals against demand orders in cases here appeal could not be filed within the allowable time period: "The Council has recommended providing an amnesty scheme through a special procedure under section 148 of CGST Act, 2017 for taxable persons, who could not file an appeal under section 107 of the said Act, against the demand order under section 73 or 74 of CGS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
