9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the Petitioner's name is correctly mentioned in the invoices, however, the wrong GST number, i.e., of the Bombay office has been mentioned. On this issue, there is no stand taken by the Department in the counter affidavit. On a direct query being put to the ld. Standing Counsel for the Respondent/Department, he fairly admits that no other entity has also claimed at the ITC on these purchases. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rasekaran, Mr. Mahir Chablani and Mr. Devansh, Advocates. For the Respondents Through: Mr. Shubham Tyagi, SSC for CBIC. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging, (i) impugned order dated 28th June, 2024, being Order-in-Original no. 04/HK/JC/CGST/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Petitioner, however, the said invoices inadvertently reflected the Bombay address and Bombay GSTN of the Petitioner, instead of the Delhi GSTN number. This has led to the impugned demand. 5. On the last hearing i.e., 8th Janurary, 2025, Mr. Tarun Gulati, Id. Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, relied upon the purchase orders and invoices, to submit that, the Petitioner is cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the ITC on these purchases. The only basis for rejecting the ITC is the mention of the Bombay office GSTN instead of the Delhi office GSTN. Substantial loss would be caused to the Petitioner if the credit is not granted for such a small error on behalf of the supplier. 9. Mr. Gulati, lastly submits that if the correction in the invoices is permitted and the Petitioner is provided the Input Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
