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>Show-Cause Notice Challenge Dismissed; Court Upholds Participation in GST Rate Dispute Process.</h1> <h3>M/s Hero Motocorp Limited Versus Union Of India, The State Of Rajasthan, The Additional Commissioner (AE), CGST, Commissionerate, Alwar, The Central Board of Indirect Taxes And Customs.</h3> The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the show-cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 regarding the GST rate increase from 18% to 28%. The court held ... Challenge to SCN in Form GST DRC-01 - main grievance of the petitioner is that by issuing show-cause notice, the respondents want to levy GST @28% instead of prevalent GST @ 18%, which the petitioner and his counterparts have been paying since 2017 - HELD THAT:- Merely because petitioner has been given notice and his counterparts have not been given notice, the same cannot said to be bad in law. We are also of the view that merely on issuing of the show-cause notice, writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked for the very reason that the petitioner has right to file reply to the show-cause notice and as per the CGST Act, they have a right to be heard before any order is passed on the show-cause notice. Further, any order passed by the authorities is appealable. There are no force in the writ petition and the same deserves to be and is accordingly, dismissed. Issues:Challenge to show-cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 dated 03.08.2024 regarding GST rate increase from 18% to 28% without referring the matter to the Board or obtaining advance ruling.Analysis:The petitioner challenged a show-cause notice seeking to increase the GST rate from 18% to 28%, arguing that similarly situated manufacturers were not issued such notices. It was contended that this increase would lead to the closure of the petitioner's establishment, as competitors would benefit. The petitioner claimed that the notice was issued without referring the matter to the Board or obtaining an advance ruling, as mandated by circulars from the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.The respondents opposed the writ petition, arguing that the show-cause notice could not be challenged through a writ petition. They contended that the petitioner could respond to the notice, and any subsequent order would be issued after providing an opportunity for a hearing under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The respondents cited a judgment related to the Excise and Customs Act, stating that any order under the CGST Act could be appealed to the Apex Court.The court considered the submissions and noted the petitioner's concern about the potential financial impact of the increased GST rate. However, the court held that the mere issuance of a show-cause notice did not warrant invoking writ jurisdiction. The petitioner had the right to respond to the notice, be heard before any order was passed, and could appeal any decision made by the authorities. The court referenced a previous case to support the argument that a show-cause notice could not be the subject of a writ petition.Ultimately, the court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to respond to the representations, and the respondents were directed to act in accordance with the law while handling the representations.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
