TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>GST Notice Challenge Rejected: Petitioner Must First Respond to Show Cause Before Seeking Judicial Review Under Section 74(1)</h1> <h3>M/s Akshat Enterprizes Versus The Commissioner, State Goods And Service Tax, U.P. Lucknow</h3> HC dismissed writ petition challenging a GST notice under Section 74(1). The court held that the petitioner must first respond to the show cause notice ... Service of SCN u/s 74(1) of the U.P. State Goods and Service Act, 2017 - intimation in terms of Section 74(5) was issued to the petitioner, to which a reply has been given under DRC 01-A, Part-B - It is contended that show cause notice has been issued on the previous terms without adjudicating the petitioner's reply. HELD THAT:- Admittedly, a show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner, allowing him to submit a reply in the matter. It is only on the failure to submit a reply that the proceedings can be initiated further. In such circumstances, the remedy of the petitioner would be to submit a reply to the notice and various submissions raised on the merits of the matter are not required to be commented upon by this court, at this stage. The writ petition stands dismissed. Issues involved: The issues involved in the judgment are the maintainability of a writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 74(1) of the U.P. State Goods and Service Act, 2017, and the requirement of submitting a reply to a show cause notice before further proceedings can be initiated.Maintainability of the writ petition: The petitioner challenged a notice issued under Section 74(1) of the Act, contending that an intimation under Section 74(5) was issued to which a reply was submitted. The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was issued without adjudicating the reply. The objection to the maintainability of the writ petition was based on the premise that an intimation under Section 74(5) is not a notice as per the Act's procedure. It was asserted that if the department is unsatisfied with the explanation provided, a show cause notice under Section 74(1) is necessary. The court noted that all issues raised by the petitioner could be addressed while responding to the show cause notice. The court emphasized that until the proceedings conclude under the GST Act, there is no basis for the court to entertain the writ petition or delve into the merits of the issues raised.Court's Decision: After hearing arguments from both sides, the court observed that a show cause notice had been issued to the petitioner, granting an opportunity to submit a reply. The court highlighted that further proceedings could only be initiated in case of a failure to submit a reply. Therefore, the court concluded that the appropriate course of action for the petitioner would be to respond to the notice. The court declined to comment on the various submissions made on the merits of the matter at that stage. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
