9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DRC-03 in cash. The reason at the footnote clearly indicated that 'the amount of penalty is paid under protest and without prejudice to our legal right of appeal'. Whereafter the order u/s 129(3) was passed on 06.10.2024 indicating a demand of Rs. 22,37,220/- and form GST DRC-07 qua the demand was also generated. However, apparently, by way of an afterthought, exercising power u/s 161 of the Act, the order dated 06.10.2024 was passed purportedly rectifying the order and the demand was indicated as 'NIL'. Though in terms of the requirement on part of the respondent to pay the amount penalty, it is true that the demand was NIL, but the deposit was under protest. The passing of the order rectifying the order passed u/s 129(3) of the Act has t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated that a vehicle loaded with goods was intercepted by respondent no. 3 for checking the goods as well as papers accompanying the goods on 29.08.2024. On being intercepted, the driver of the vehicle produced documents accompanying the goods and the authority formed an opinion that prima facie there was difference in quantity of goods loaded in the vehicle and described in the document. The petitioner submitted letter dated 29.09.2024 seeking to explain the reasons for difference in quantity and as the goods were perishable in nature, requested for release of the goods. The goods in question were detained by issuing order in MOV-06 on 01.10.2024 for further action on account of mismatch in weight and show-cause notice was issued on the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctifying the order dated 06.10.2024 is wholly unjustified. It is submitted that while making payment through DRC-03, a specific endorsement regarding the same being under protest was made and, therefore, the passing of the rectification order was unwarranted and illegal. Submissions have been made that on account of passing of the order dated 08.10.2024, the outstanding demand is being shown as 'NIL' and the portal of the department is not accepting the appeal against the order dated 06.10.2024, which takes away the right of appeal of the petitioner. Submissions have been made that the conditions precedent for exercise of power under Section 161 of the Act were absent and, as such, the order passed is wholly without jurisdiction. 7. Furthe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indicated that 'the amount of penalty is paid under protest and without prejudice to our legal right of appeal'. Whereafter the order under Section 129(3) was passed on 06.10.2024 indicating a demand of Rs. 22,37,220/- and form GST DRC-07 qua the demand was also generated. However, apparently, by way of an afterthought, exercising power under Section 161 of the Act, the order dated 06.10.2024 was passed purportedly rectifying the order and the demand was indicated as 'NIL'. 11. Though in terms of the requirement on part of the respondent to pay the amount penalty, it is true that the demand was NIL, but the deposit was under protest. The passing of the order rectifying the order passed under Section 129(3) of the Act has the implication th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
