2025 (4) TMI 303

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gendran, M. Shylaja and Rishal. K For the Respondent : Adv P.R Sreejith, SC and SMT. DR. Thushara James, Senior Government Pleader JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P1 order issued under Section 73(9) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short, 'CGST Act'). As per the said order, petitioner has been imposed with tax, interest and penalty to the tune of Rs.22,42,024/-. 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the petitioner had sufficient ITC available to clear the tax liability and further that there was no fraudulent or other attempt to evade tax. Subsequent to the above reply notice, an opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner. However, petitioner found appear and thereafter the impugned order Ext.P1 was issued. 3. I have heard Sri. Raghunathan P., the learned counsel for the petitioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted that there is no tax liability and that the mistake occurred due to an error in entering the data. It was always open for the officer to have verified whether the mistake was bonafide and if required even call for the records or peruse the records available with the officer. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the view that the Ext.P1 being a non-speaking order is liable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X