9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the petitioner earlier - ineligible Input Tax Credit (ITC) was reversed - HELD THAT:- It is evident that the petitioner had remitted a sum of Rs. 59,05,950/- towards ineligible ITC in respect of IGST and a further sum of Rs. 44,62,969/- towards ineligible ITC in respect of CGST. Such remittances were made in 2017 and 2018, which is prior to the issuance of the show cause notice. Learned counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isposed off by way of remand. - Honourable Mr. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Ramanathan For the Respondent : Mr. A.P. Srinivas, Senior Standing Counsel ORDER An order in original dated 22.11.2022 is assailed in this writ petition in so far as penalty was imposed without taking into consideration the amounts remitted by the petitioner earlier. Upon receipt of show c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturns in 2017 2018 were being appropriated. In those circumstances, learned counsel contends that 10% of such amounts could not have been imposed as penalty as per sub-section (9) of Section 73 of applicable GST enactments. Therefore, he submits that the matter requires reconsideration only in so far as penalty is concerned. 3. Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned senior standing counsel, appears on behalf o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... newly introducing Section 128A of applicable GST enactments. These facts and circumstances justify reconsideration only in so far as imposition of penalty is concerned. 5. For reasons aforesaid, the impugned order dated 22.11.2022 is set aside only in so far as the imposition of penalty is concerned. Consequently, the matter is remanded to the respondent for the limited purpose indicated above and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
