2024 (7) TMI 1105

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cause the consultant engaged by the petitioner had not informed the petitioner about these proceedings - HELD THAT:- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that the tax proposal was confirmed because the petitioner did not reply to the show cause notice. It also appears that the proposal relates to a comparison between the inward supply, as gleaned from the GSTR 2A, and the outward supply. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ause the consultant engaged by the petitioner had not informed the petitioner about these proceedings, the present writ petition was filed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had opted for the composition scheme and filed returns in Form GSTR 4 on quarterly basis. In these circumstances, he submits that the confirmed tax proposal is unsustainable because such tax pro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pted for composition levy and filed quarterly returns in Form GSTR 4. In these circumstances, the interest of justice warrants re-consideration, albeit by putting the petitioner on terms. 5. Therefore, impugned order dated 22.12.2023 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Wit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X