9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1032X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made above are sufficient response to the objections raised by the petitioner. Similarly, the absence of the petitioner at the address available with the assessing office cannot amount to non-service of notice on the petitioner. On the question of non-furnishing of the report of the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Enforcement), Bangalore, Karnataka, the Judgment of Division Bench of the Common Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sri Nallana Sambasiva Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [ 2015 (2) TMI 1377 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT] followed, which had held that an assessment based on material and reports submitted by Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Authority can be upheld only when such reports are supplied to the assessee alo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the petitioner that the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Enforcement), Bangalore, Karnataka had sent a communication dated 05.10.2021 stating that input tax credit of Rs. 7,13,917/- has been fraudulently availed on the basis of invoices said to have been issued by one M/s. Manjunatha Marketing, Bengaluru without actual receipt of goods. The show-cause notice called upon the petitioner to either furnish the final return in GSTR-10 or to pay the wrongly availed ITC amount of Rs. 7,13,917/-. The petitioner filed his objections dated 10.01.2022. The 1st respondent, who had issued the show-cause notice, had passed an order of assessment requiring the petitioner to pay tax of Rs. 7,13,917/- and penalty of Rs. 7,13,917/- apart from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ench of the Common High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Sri Nallana Sambasiva Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2015) 61 APSTJ 255. iii) The Third ground raised by the petitioner is that section 75 (4) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 requires the assessing officer to grant a personal hearing either if the assessee so requires or if the assessing officer proposes to pass an order adverse to the interest of assessee. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the present case, such an opportunity of personal hearing should have been given to the petitioner as the assessing officer was proposing to pass an order adverse to the petitioner. He would also submit that no such notice of personal hearing was served on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmits that the petitioner should have approached the authority in person for perusal of the documents. 8. As far as grounds 1 2 are concerned, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order of the 1st respondent-assessing officer. A perusal of the objections raised by the petitioner would show that the said objections are extracts of various Judgments and a statement that all necessary documents are available with the petitioner. In such circumstances, the observations of the assessing officer made above are sufficient response to the objections raised by the petitioner. Similarly, the absence of the petitioner at the address available with the assessing office cannot amount to non-service of notice on the petitioner. 9. Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
