9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 286X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. Rajesh Mahna, Mr. Ramanand Roy, Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Tiwari, Mr. Mayank Kouts, Mr. Shiva Narang and Mr. Silky Wadhwa, Advocates For the Respondents: Mr. Rajiv Aggarwal, ASC with Ms. Samridhi Vats, Advocate JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner impugns order dated 25.12.2023, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 26.09.2023, proposing a demand of Rs. 44,48,488.00 agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly was furnished by the petitioner giving disclosures under each of the heads. 4. The impugned order, however, after recording the narration, records that the reply uploaded by the taxpayer is insufficient and unsatisfactory. It merely states that "And whereas, the Taxpayer filed reply/explanation on dated 23.10.2023 and 26.10.2023. And whereas, reply filed by the taxpayer was examined as per the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctory as per the detail given below." The Proper Officer has opined that the reply is insufficient and unsatisfactory. 5. The impugned order does not specifically deal with the reply dated 23.10.2023 given by the petitioner, however, refers to certain judgment to hold that the burden to prove admissibility of any input tax credit cannot be shifted to the Tax Authorities. The Proper Officer has no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame within two weeks from today in support of his reply to the Show Cause Notice and thereafter the Proper Officer shall re-adjudicate the Show Cause Notice after giving an opportunity of personal hearing and shall pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law within the period prescribed under Section 75(3) of the Act. 8. It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
