9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er dated 29.12.2023 (hereafter the impugned order) passed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the CGST Act) and the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the DGST Act), whereby, the demand of Rs.18,30,522/- has been raised on account of tax for the period July, 2017 to March, 2018 along with interest and penalty. 4. The impugned order was passed pursuant to the show cause notice dated 26.09.2023 (hereafter the impugned SCN), whereby, the petitioner was called upon to show cause why a demand for tax aggregating Rs.17,43,356/- along with interest and applicable penalty not be raised. The attachment to the impugned SCN states that the petitioner's GST returns (G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... details of the payments made to the said supplier. 8. It appears that the petitioner is being mulcted with the tax liability on account of the GST registration of one of its suppliers (Modern Traders) being cancelled with retrospective effect. The annexure to the impugned order does not set out any reasons for rejecting the petitioner's claim that it is a bona fide purchaser and it had purchased the goods from the dealer/supplier (Modern Traders) after payment of taxes. The impugned order also does not indicate that the supplier in question (Modern Traders) has not deposited the tax due on the supplies made to the petitioner, which was one of the allegations made in the impugned SCN. 9. The impugned order is unreasoned and the only ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d order is unreasoned, in the peculiar facts, we do not consider it apposite to relegate the petitioner to avail the remedy of an appeal. 13. The impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Officer to decide afresh in accordance with law after affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. 14. The petitioner is also at liberty to furnish such further documents including documents to substantiate that it had, in fact, received the supply from the named supplier (Modern Traders) during the relevant period or any other material that the petitioner considers relevant. This is considering the allegation that the invoices produced by the petitioner are "Good-less invoices", that is, no goods had been supplied b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
