9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the show cause notice, it appears that the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why ITC should not be denied because the supply falls within the scope of sub-section (5) of Section 17. The petitioner replied stating that supply of services by an auditor does not fall within the scope of sub-section (5) of Section 17. The show cause notice did not call upon the petitioner to produce relevant invoices. The petitioner has also placed invoices on record. In these circumstances, reconsideration is necessary on this issue. Alleged purchase of goods falling under HSN 85171110 - HELD THAT:- The petitioner asserted that it deals with online recharge coupons and not mobile phones. At the time of audit, the petitioner has produced extensi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the ground that the respondent failed to consider the petitioner's reply and instead confirmed the audit observations in the form of an adjudication order. 2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of purchasing and selling recharge coupons of Sun TV and Vodafone. Upon receipt of audit observations, the petitioner responded thereto on 25.09.2023. After audit report dated 28.09.2023 was issued, the respondent issued a show cause notice to the petitioner and the petitioner replied thereto. The impugned order was issued thereafter on 30.12.2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the impugned order in respect of four issues. The first issue dealt with by him was the denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) in respect of payments ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as submitted as evidence of payment to the creditor. The last issue dealt with by learned counsel was alleged non maintenance of stock registers. On this issue, he pointed out that the petitioner replied by stating that the transactions are exclusively through an online portal. He also pointed out that the audit report records that maintenance of stock register is inapplicable. 4. In response to these contentions, Mr. T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader, who accepts notice for the respondent, submits that the petitioner failed to produce documents before the proper officer at the time of adjudication. Therefore, he submits that the tax proposals were confirmed. 5. The first issue dealt with by learned counsel for the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is three days. In the absence of evidence of non payment for more than 180 days, it could not have been concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to avail of ITC in this regard. As regards non maintenance of the stock register, even the audit report indicates that it is inapplicable to the nature of services provided by the petitioner. 7. For reasons set out above, the impugned order is unsustainable and is hereby set aside. As a corollary, the matter is remanded for reconsideration by the respondent. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a personal hearing, the respondent is directed to pass a fresh order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. The writ peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
