9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. Saravanan For the Petitioner : Mr. B. Rooban For the Respondents : Mr. R. Suresh Kumar Additional Government Pleader ORDER The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the second respondent/the State Tax Officer. The impugned order precedes the notice issued to the petitioner in ASMT - 10 dated 07.01.2020 as also the intimation in DRC -01A as also the notice i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the balance amount for a sum of Rs. 38,09,435/- was not availed in GSTR 3B. It is submitted that the second respondent has confirmed the demand based on the wrong interpretation of the data furnished by the petitioner in the reply. 5. The petitioner has drawn attention to the calculations, as far as the tax liability of the petitioner is concerned, qua IGST as also CGST, in paragraph 12 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal -9,34,008 24,49,259 24,49,259 (v+vi) Excess Nil +7,53,965 +3,42,933" 6. Defending the impugned order, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent would submit that the impugned order is dated 31.01.2020, whereas the present writ petition has been filed on 03.03.2021. It is therefore submitted that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on account of laches, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. 11. I am of the view that the writ petition challenging the impugned order belatedly long after the order was passed, was not maintainable. 12. Be that as it may, the petitioner may have a case for proper explanation before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 107 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
