2025 (1) TMI 1421

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct, 2017 for the financial year 2019-20 - comparison of GSTR-3B and e-way bill - HELD THAT:- In the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent there is no reference to the contention raised by the petitioner at all and it is simply stated that the reply of the petitioner is not satisfactory. Since the purpose of issuing ASMT-10 is to invite a reply and then consider the said reply. It is failed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... allowed by way of remand.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Ostwal, Adv Mr. Pratyush Kr. Jha, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. A.K.Yadav, Sr. S.C.-I Mr. Aditya Kumar, A.C. to Sr. S.C.I. Heard both sides. 2. Petitioner in this writ petition has challenged order dated 31.08.2024 passed by the 5th responden .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... SMT-10 is to invite a reply and then consider the said reply. We fail to understand why the 5th respondent did not aver to the contention raised in the reply filed by the petitioner and brushed it aside by simply saying it is not satisfactory. 6. Therefore, the impugned order dt. 31.08.2024 is set aside, and the matter is remitted to the 5th respondent who shall furnish to the petitioner the basi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X