Court Restrains Coercive Recovery, Allows Direct Service. The court issued a notice returnable on 27th February, 2019, restraining coercive recovery by respondents and allowing direct service to respondent No.2. ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court Restrains Coercive Recovery, Allows Direct Service.
The court issued a notice returnable on 27th February, 2019, restraining coercive recovery by respondents and allowing direct service to respondent No.2. This decision acknowledges petitioner's interpretation of section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, ensuring a fair adjudication process and granting temporary relief pending a final decision.
Issues involved: Interpretation of section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 regarding credit of eligible duties in respect of inputs held in stock on the appointed day.
Analysis: 1. The petitioner's advocate highlighted the provisions of section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, specifically sub-section (3), which allows certain registered dealers to take credit of eligible duties for inputs held in stock on the appointed day, subject to conditions. The advocate argued that all conditions under sub-section (3) were satisfied by the petitioner. Emphasizing on clause (iii) of sub-section (3), it was pointed out that the registered person must possess invoices or prescribed documents showing duty payment under the previous law for such inputs. As no specific documents were prescribed under the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, the advocate contended that the petitioner, who provided evidence of duty payment, should be entitled to the credit.
2. Considering the arguments put forth by the petitioner's advocate, the court issued a notice returnable on 27th February, 2019. As an interim measure, the respondents were restrained from enforcing any coercive recovery related to the subject matter of the petition. Additionally, direct service was allowed concerning respondent No.2. This decision reflects the court's acknowledgment of the petitioner's contentions regarding the interpretation and application of section 140 of the Act, ensuring a fair adjudication process while providing temporary relief to the petitioner pending a final decision on the matter.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
