Challenge to GST Show Cause Notice Sees Partial Success, Restricts Final Order Without Court Permission HC ruled on a GST show cause notice challenge, partially favoring the petitioner. While not completely staying the notice, the court restricted ...
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.
Challenge to GST Show Cause Notice Sees Partial Success, Restricts Final Order Without Court Permission
HC ruled on a GST show cause notice challenge, partially favoring the petitioner. While not completely staying the notice, the court restricted respondents from passing a final order without permission. The HC granted the petitioner four weeks to file a response, mandated an opportunity for hearing, and directed respondents to file an affidavit-in-opposition, scheduling further proceedings in August 2024.
Issues Involved: Challenge to show cause notice u/s 73(1) of WBGST & CGST Act, 2017; Validity of time limit extension notifications; Jurisdictional issue; Stay of show cause notice; Opportunity to file response; Affidavit-in-opposition filing timeline.
Summary: The petitioner challenged a show cause notice issued u/s 73(1) of the WBGST & CGST Act, 2017 for the tax period from April 2019 to March 2020, citing an outer time limit provision in the statute. The respondents extended the time limit through notifications, leading to the issuance of the notice dated 28th March 2024. The petitioner argued that the extension was a colorable exercise of power and sought a stay on the notice.
The petitioner also referred to Section 168A of the Act, contending that the show cause notice was an initiation of proceedings under Section 73(9) and that the extension notifications were invalid. The petitioner requested a stay on the notice to prevent the completion of the process and the passing of a final order, which would render the writ petition infructuous.
In response, the petitioner requested an opportunity to file a response to the show cause notice if the court allowed the proper officer to conclude the proceeding. The respondent's advocate sought leave to file an affidavit-in-opposition and opposed the injunction on the proper officer from proceeding with the notice.
After hearing both parties, the court acknowledged the jurisdictional issue raised by the petitioner but decided not to stay the show cause notice due to the involvement of the state's fiscal policy. The court directed that the respondents could continue with the proceeding but could not pass a final order or upload it without the court's permission.
Furthermore, the court extended the time for the petitioner to file a response by four weeks and mandated that the proper officer provide an opportunity for a hearing regarding the response. The court also instructed the filing of an affidavit-in-opposition within four weeks after the summer break, with a reply due two weeks thereafter, listing the matter for a hearing in August 2024.
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 
