2024 (8) TMI 512

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... claimed by the petitioner was greater than the amount declared by the petitioner s supplier - HELD THAT:- The impugned order does not indicate that any of the contentions advanced by the petitioner were considered. The petitioner s reply was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority by simply observing that it was not found satisfactory. The impugned order is, thus, unreasoned and is liable to be set .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion impugning an order dated 17.04.2024 (hereafter the impugned order) passed under Section 73 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the DGST Act) and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the CGST Act) confirming the demand of ₹89,83,380/- including interest and penalty for the financial year 2018-19. 2. The impugned order was passed pursuant to the Sho .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... retrospective cancellation of the GST registration of the said suppliers does not imply that the suppliers did not pay the tax and this was the principal ground on which the Adjudicating Authority had imposed the liability on the petitioner. 5. The reply furnished by the petitioner indicates that the petitioner had not selected the option for personal hearing. The learned counsel for the petitione .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X