9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 604X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ached in W.P. No. 202419/2019. As per the order passed by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court stayed the operation of Annexure A so as to provide an opportunity for the writ petitioner to approach the respondent/authority for processing his request vide Annexure B in the said writ petition. The time limit was also prescribed in the said order of maximum period of 15 days. Section 16 (1) of the CGST Act and effect of Section 16(2) of the said Act has been considered by the authority and so also Section 41 (1) and 41 (2) of the said Acts were considered by the respondent. The respondent also considered the effect of Section 49 of the said Act which deals with the payment of tax, interest, penalty and other amount in the light of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the proceedings No. OC/108/2019 of the Respondent dated 03.06.2019 (Annexure-D). b) Gran such other reliefs which this Honourable Court deems fit in the circumstances of this case. In W.P. No. 202419/2019: a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ order or direction, quashing the proceedings of the respondent herein in OC No. 45/2019 dated 12.04.2019 (Annexure-A) b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the respondent herein to complete the adjudication in terms of Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 after issuance of a show cause notice in terms of Section 73(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly hearing heard and therefore, the demand under Annexure D is illegal. It is also the grievance of the writ petitioner that the online portal did not work properly and therefore, the petitioner could not upload eligible input tax credit and there was a shortfall in upholding the books of account claiming for edibility insofar as the input tax credit is concerned and therefore, the shortfall has occurred which is beyond the control of the petitioner and therefore, sought for waiver of the interest by quashing the interest at Annexure D. 8. Such contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner cannot be countenanced in law for more than one reason. In the first place, there was a shortfall of Rs. 3,82,97,676/- vide Annexure A. The petitioner ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in the light of the delayed made by the petitioner. 10. Taking note of all these aspects of the matter and also considering the judgment of the High Court of Telangana in W.P. No. 44517/2018, in the case of M/s. Megha Engineering Infrastructures Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad and others, especially adverting to paragraph Nos. 36 and 38 of the said judgment, respondent over-ruled all the objections taken by the petitioner in making the belated payment of tax and directed that the petitioner is under statutory obligation to pay interest on the total tax liability. 11. Under such circumstances, the contentions urged in the writ petitions on behalf of the petitioner cannot be countenanced in law. 12. Therefore, the follow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
